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.
Is that the statue in the Capital Rotunda that was draped so as not to offend the ant-porn mob?
In an ideal society, there would be no government and there would be no need for this. Do you live in an ideal society? I thought not. Both anarchy and libertarianism are the governments of Heaven. That is, people are entirely self-motivated because they have subscribed to the right beliefs and ideals, and there is no need for government.
However, for the rest of us, this isn't the case. Government does have an obligation to protect the weak (such as children and even animals) against exploitation, and it also has a responsibility to create conditions that promote the common good.
It would be hard to argue in any way, shape or form that your love of pornography fosters the common good. It's not good for the women in the films you watch, it's certainly not good for the children and even the animals, and in the long run, it's not even good for you. In fact, it's probably worst for you, and gives you a way of looking at life that is probably going to mess you up permanently. So, yes, I'd say the common good is affected and that society should respond.
If you think that's the "proper" analogy, then you're engaged in the same exercise in rationalization he is - that one abuse of the government justifies another. If you want your state government to engage in this kind of propaganda campaign, that's within their pervue. If you want it regulated the way the Archbishop does "like toxic waste" - by federal bureaucrats - then I'm not going to join you.
We don't live in an ideal society, we live in a constitutional republic. That means that we have different levels of government that exercise control within their own appropriate sphere. Do you want to declare it all irrelevant because it isn't and never will be perfect?
No, you're the one who wants to do that.
A republic is a res publica, a "thing of the people." We have to make sure that this particular thing expresses the values of the people we want to be. No society has ever existed without values.
Many libertarians seem to believe that having no values is the ultimate liberty, and want the society around them to reflect this. Is that what you want?
One thing you can say about the Internet making porn widely accessible, It created all those niche markets
Exactly.
I also think that it's rather interesting that the U.S. Supreme Court can define legally whether a tomato is a fruit or vegetable (Nix v. Hedden, 149 U.S. 304; 1893), but still cannot even remotely define what is obscene.
The War on Porn will always be futile until we have a reasonable, concrete definition of what exactly constitutes obscenity.
Simply because what you and I and someone else here might consider to be obscene may very well be three separate things.
I am reminded when Mary, the Immaculate One, showed the children of Fatima a glimpse of hell and told them that more souls are in hell because of sins of the flesh than for any other reason.
This is the religion forum, and that's a debate for politics and activism. I'll be happy to take it up with you there. If you want to take that argument into a debate on the Constitution and the Republic you're welcome to, and I'll be happy to oblige you. I'll tell you right now you'll get various pieces of your anatomy handed to you on a platter, rhetorically speaking.
They know more about all the trials and troubles of marriage and the depths of the human heart than any one of us . . . a good part of their job is to hear (and forgive) people's most secret sins that they would never tell to anyone save under the absolute seal of the confessional . . .
Uh oh, we better give up the fight, before it's too late!
Did you ever read, De Tocqueville ?
no amount of sophistry can make a free person believe that porn is something relegated to the private sphere, like the choice of solid color or argyle socks. It is obvious, porn is wrong and tends strongly to undermine the welfare of the country we claim to care about. There may be an honest debate about the means to discourage it.
I understand the appeal to the "Constitution" but with all due respect that argument has no real world chance. Are you also one who wants to do away with social security? There are yes 10,000 things which do go against the constitution. Your line of argument is tilting at windmills.
We better decriminalize murder, because that might lead to the punishment of people who were merely defending themselves. (And, come to think of it, murder is as old as humanity itself)
exactly
sexual/porn problems are generally spiritual problems acted out with perverse use of the body
a real "sexual" problem needs a physician
I think most people can tell the difference between right and wrong, good and evil. The idea that what is porn to one, isn't porn to another so popular the last few years sounds like an excuse to me to promote pornography. I am not accusing you of that before you get upset, you didn't coin that phrase of course! I know I know the difference anyway, and think most do. JMO.
Unlike obscenity though, there is at least a universal consensus on what constitutes murder, and what the justifiable defenses are (e.g. self-defense).
Secondly, murder is codified in every statute and the Model Penal Code broken down by degrees and the elements for each crime. Further, there's other related crimes (reckless injury, manslaughter, etc.) that may also fit the bill.
Our point is that while we may agree that obscene stuff is harmful, nothing can be done about it until we as a society figure out what constitutes obscenity. Then we can begin to create standards, laws, etc. around that definition.
You think you're going to run to Congress and get national laws that reflect the values of your community? What you're going to end up with is local laws that reflect the values of the beltway. You can't be dumb enough that you don't understand that this is not something to be turned over to the federal government and then handed off to a bureaucracy.
Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2354:
2354 Pornography consists in removing real or simulated sexual acts from the intimacy of the partners, in order to display them deliberately to third parties. It offends against chastity because it perverts the conjugal act, the intimate giving of spouses to each other. It does grave injury to the dignity of its participants (actors, vendors, the public), since each one becomes an object of base pleasure and illicit profit for others. It immerses all who are involved in the illusion of a fantasy world. It is a grave offense. Civil authorities should prevent the production and distribution of pornographic materials.
This is surely what Archbishop Chaput is speaking of. He is, in fact, a theologian.
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.