Skip to comments.Porn Is Like Heroin In The Brain
Posted on 11/19/2004 3:07:51 PM PST by Lindykim
Porn Like Heroin in the Brain by Stuart Shepard, correspondent
Senate committee discusses pornography and the First Amendment.
Experts on pornography's effects on brain chemistry testified at a Senate hearing this week where a key point of discussion was whether porn is a form of speech protected by the First Amendment or addictive material that should be unlawful.
Psychiatrist Jeffrey Satinover described how pornography is analogous to cigarettes, noting that "it is a very carefully designed delivery system for evoking a tremendous flood within the brain of endogenous opioids." It's time, he added, to stop regarding it as simply a form of expression. "Modern science," Satinover said, "allows us to understand that the underlying nature of an addiction to pornography is chemically nearly identical to a heroin addiction."
Dr. Mary Anne Layden with the Center for Cognitive Therapy at the University of Pennsylvania explained how a pornographic image is burned into the brain's pathways.
"That image is in your brain forever," she explained. "If that was an addictive substance, you, at any point for the rest of your life, could in a nanosecond draw it up."
Dr. Judith Reisman, president of the Institute for Media Education, called on the Senate to take action against pornography, saying it's time to mandate that law enforcement begin to collect all data and pornographic materials found in the possession of anyone involved in criminal activity. Doing so, she added, would yield data showing whether pornography is being used as a how-to manual for sex crimes.
"The evidence the panelists presented showed an overwhelming harm from pornography," said Daniel Weiss, media and sexuality analyst with Focus on the Family. He hopes the Senate will turn the evidence into action.
TAKE ACTION/FOR MORE INFORMATION If you think Congress should be taking serious action against pornography, you can start by thanking Sen. Sam Brownback for calling the hearing, then contact your representatives in Congress and let them know what you think. For help in contacting your elected representatives, please see our CitizenLink Action Center.
Also, to learn more about one person's struggles with pornography, we suggest the resource "An Affair of the Mind: One Woman's Courageous Battle to Salvage Her Family From the Devastation of Pornography." Author Laurie Hall shares her courageous struggle to protect herself and two children from her husband's addiction to pornography.
Good luck with your doggie.
This does not apply to pornography. Someone with a morbid fascination with porn may spend his (Or her) time looking at it to the exclusion of other, more productive activities (Like work) but stopping causes no trauma and can easily be effected by simply making the decision to do something else.
In the end most so-called addictions are really a matter of an individual making the decision, or not, to continue. In any case, its none of the government's business.
"Banning pornographic material? Goodbye freedom of speech!"
The Framers of the constitution were interested in protecting political speech not purile entertainment.
I don't think "entertainment" should enjoy 1rst Ammendment protection. That isn't what the intent was.
In this case the pornography would be the evidence of a crime, i.e. photographs or films of child abuse, nicht war?
Will you have the same concern for the intent of the Commerce Clause if they try to use that to prohibit it?
Any recommended web sites? :-)
I believe you are addressing the wrong post. Mine was:
An addiction for which there is no cure, thus the outrageous tragedy to introduce it to young, curious minds.
Once something is SEEN, the mind can never forget, and the rest you go figure, hence the Jeffry Dommers (spelling?)of the world. The Internet should hang its head - biggest money maker is porn.
However, I agree with you, the government has no business in this one.
Dept of Justice Study Shows Rape Down [year 2000]
Statistics recently released by the US Justice Department show that the number of rapes, attempted rapes and sexual assaults declined substantially last year.
Since 1993, rapes have declined by 60%; attempted rapes by 71.4%; and sexual assaults by 37.5%, according to NCVS figures.
I disagree. The powers the representatives of the original states transferred to the federal government were fixed at the time of transfer, as the were understood by the people who granted them. Without any knowlege of "intent", or care as to what the commonly understood meanings of the words were at that time the Constitution has no fixed meaning, but changes with the common usage and meanings of the words. You can redefine what the Constitution says, simply by redefining the words.
Over time she became complete disfunctional and was sucked in by the novels fantasies and feelings -- she became massively depressed -- refused treatment and meds, and then one day deserted me and her children.
I don't totally blame it on the romance novels she read but that became a major source of input and stimulous for her while real life family and friends became so much less to her she needed her daily romance novel fix.
Before she left she got introduced to anime and she had a feeding frenzy on the emotion of cartoon characters. So when she needed more of a fix she became sucked into gay anime and anime porn.
I can say that it was clearly an emotional addiction on her part, she continually needed larger and more potent doses until she was cloistered in her room night and day by herself perched in front of a computer.
Notch by notch she channged from a Church going Christian to a hedonist -- she went from being atuanch conservative to a liberal. I wish I could say it wasn't true and I confess I miss the woman that I married in bible school who had a heart for the Lord -- And my children greatly miss their mom too.
No sex or chocolate?! Oh no! What is there left then?
You don't get it. It perfectly reasonable to make Jeffrey Dahmer a central argument in a discussion about pornography. Bringing Jim Jones into a discussion about religion would be a cheap shot.
it's wierd--someone from the Center for Cognitive Therapy doesn't seem to realize that there is a difference between the mind and the brain. there are no images in the brain, burned there or otherwise. dissect a brain and you won't find images, just nerve cells, etc.
(the images would be in the mind)
and what research does she cite that proves that the images are there FOREVER?
these people are pushing a moral agenda under the guise of psychiatry.
They combine junk science and psycho-babble.
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.