Posted on 03/21/2007 9:14:58 AM PDT by Frank Sheed
A friend recently quipped to me that if Americans were as good at the “war on terror” as we are in our “war on common sense,” the world would be a much safer place. He was talking about our country’s increasingly confused attitudes toward sex.
Last week offered a good example. In an interview with the Chicago Tribune, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Marine Gen. Peter Pace, said that “I believe that homosexual acts between individuals are immoral and that we should not condone immoral acts. I do not believe the United States is well-served by a policy that says it is OK to be immoral in any way.”
Note that Pace did not say that, “homosexual persons are evil.” He said that homosexual acts are wrong. And of course he’s right. We might question the general’s choice to comment in the context he did, but not his content. He simply stated the Western moral tradition. We should respect his courage for saying it. Every human being has an inalienable dignity as an image of God. But as part of that dignity, we also have free will, and our choices — our behaviors — create wholeness or havoc around us, depending on their moral content.
Our sexual behavior is never merely a “private” matter. Human sexuality is deeply linked to issues of identity, fertility and new life. Our sexual behavior always has social implications because it directly or indirectly impacts others. Therefore it helps shape the wider culture. This is not a uniquely Christian point of view. Most Americans clearly agree with Gen. Pace. The only thing strange about his remarks was the theatrical wave of shock they generated from critics. In fact, with the good exception of Sen. Sam Brownback and some others, many members of Congress scrambled to criticize Gen. Pace — despite the moral beliefs of the people who elected them.
The bickering over Gen. Pace is just an icon of wider problems. The sexual confusion at the top of U.S. society now has an echo in every corner of American life. Sexually transmitted disease, child sexual abuse, adult Internet predators, divorce, cohabitation and nearly every other indicator of a dysfunctional society stand at epidemic levels. But very few people want to name the biggest single environmental crisis we face: a multi-billion dollar pornography industry that pours garbage into our homes every day through the Web and other media.
Forty years ago, when steel mills pumped hundreds of tons of toxic waste each week into the Great Lakes — literally “killing” Lake Erie and damaging the health of tens of thousands of families — citizens got organized. They forced the mills to clean up or shut down. We need to do the same today. Citizens need to stop the pornography industry now — not out of some kind of Victorian prudery, but because pornography poisons the human heart, imagination and soul just as those steel mills once poisoned our air and water, only worse.
Pornography is never “innocent entertainment,” no matter how private it might seem. It turns human beings into objects. It coarsens our appetites. It darkens our ability to see real human beauty. It creates impossible expectations about sexual intimacy. It kills enduring romance and friendship between the sexes. And ultimately it’s a lie and a cheat. Pornography is a cheap, quick, empty copy of the real thing — the real joy of sexual intimacy shared by a man and woman who have joined their lives in a loving marriage.
In recent months, two Catholic bishops have begun some extraordinary work against pornography in their Midwest dioceses: Bishop Robert Finn of Kansas City-St. Joseph, Mo., and Archbishop Joseph Naumann of Kansas City, Kan.
Bishop Finn’s excellent pastoral letter, “Blessed Are the Pure in Heart: The Dignity of the Human Person and the Dangers of Pornography,” has a wealth of good information about the scope of pornography, the damage it does and many practical tips to fighting it in our homes. Archbishop Naumann’s anti-pornography initiative, “As for Me and My House, We Will Serve the Lord,” includes a DVD and workbook with valuable resources for fighting pornography, teaching chastity and wholesome sexuality, and helping others who have been hurt by pornography addiction.
We can’t do much to fix the sexual confusion at the top of our society, beyond writing to our elected officials and demanding candidates who will advance our convictions when the time comes to vote. But we can do a lot about the poison in our homes and local communities. Pornography is poison. It should be controlled like any other toxic waste. And don’t be fooled. This isn’t “censorship.” It’s a matter of public health and common sense.
Bishop Finn’s pastoral letter can be found online at www.diocese-kcsj.org; click on “Bishop,” then on the pastoral letter. For information on Archbishop Naumann’s anti-pornography initiative, contact the Archdiocese of Kansas City, Kan., at 913-721-1097.
And that's the vice of this thread (pun intended).
Which one? Democracy in America? Or the Old Regime and the Revolution?
By contrast, porn in America flew relatively under the radar until the 1960s. The only major legislation that dealth with pornography on the national level was the 1930 Tariff Act and that only prevented a person from bringing pornography in from another country(with good reason. German porn is really disturbing). There were various local ordinances limiting and prohibiting the sale of Pornography (sort of like alcohol "dry laws"), but like most other vices, it was considered a personal indiscretion. Even today's standard of "obscenity" as defined by Miller v. California is at best vague.
The average person wouldn't confess to owning or possessing pornography in the same way they wouldn't confess to being an inebriate. While it would be nice if everyone in America was a fine, upstanding, moral person, unfortunately, that's not the America we live in and it never has been. Ultimately, we aren't talking apples and oranges, we're talking simple supply and demand. If you take away the supply, it doesn't get rid of the demand, it only makes the supply scarcer and more valuable. Ultimately, you are not solving the problem of a desire for pornography or people who become psychologically addicted to pornography. Banning pornography just serves to make you feel as if you've actually accomplished something worthwhile.
I'm also glad to see that you didn't actually disagree that if the production or possession of pornography were criminalized, that it would only be a matter of time before it became a new source of income for organized crime.
Yep. No one has to sneak into sleazy dark dirty book stores any more.
What a crock.
Much better stated than I could have done.
There are some who are not familiar with the Holy Bible who would consider portions of the Song of Solomon pornographic if read out of context.
It is not just being exposed to watching porn but minors who are used to produce porn suffer horrific consequences as well as adults who are forced to appear in it. I recall some pedophile saying that it didn't occur to him to go after children until he saw how much fun it is.
Just because porn is hard to fight and there is a "supply and demand" does not mean that something this demented should be ignored and people be told "just use your keyboard" - that is giving it a legitimacy. There also was a "supply and demand" for slaves but slavery is wrong and was made illegal.
Yep. All porn is child porn, or might as well be. Moral absolutes and all that. There can be no middle ground or moderation.
All of that flying straight in the face of the fact that Jesus established communion with wine and Himself was known to be a wine drinker. He even created wine out of water for a party
You are comparing Ted Bundy to porn?
We already agreed on those definitions and principles at the founding of this Country. The Ten Commandments have not been rescinded. They have 'only' been eclipsed by a penumbra here and there.
Time for the sun to shine again.
No, there can be no middle ground when it comes to child porn - a growing industry. Of course there are moral absolutes such as no innocent person should be framed for a crime they did not commit, the selling and buying of a human being is wrong and should be prohibited, etc. Same with child porn. Anyone who produced, distributes, possesses, or supports child porn is demented.
Not necessarily.
Yes, the Ten Commandments stil exist.
However, they do NOT explain the variance in opinion between even between conservatives. Thus a definition is still required if we're going to get anywhere.
I notice you negeleted to address to statement that all porn is child porn, or might as well be. That's a rather glaring omission from the person who turned a general discussion about pornography to the subject of child porn for no apparent reason.
I call your one 'variance in opinion' and raise you one deviance FROM moral absolutes. And if I may be permitted a bit of word-play, every standard deviation is a slip down the slope.
Yes. Moral absolutes exist.
However, the variance of opinion still makes it necessary despite the moral absolutes on the subject. Heck, the moral absolutes come into play when formulating and codifying such a definition.
Moreover (and rather sadly), society can't agree on the very principle of moral absolutism, therefore, it's all the more critical to come to a consensus as to what's considered obscene.
As conservatives, we ought to be taking that bull by the horns...
"Obscene" is a subjective determination, and as such is incompatible with the application of absolutes.
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.