The Panty Jihad (UK Muslims angry)

frontpagemag ^ | June 15, 2004 | By Val MacQueen

[Pyro7480]

Sounded like a cry for help to me

Oh BS. I already explained I was paraphrasing someone, whose name is Peter Kreeft, and I explained my response. Now let's just drop it!

[NCPAC]

"Then you are defining deviancy downward. If this is not soft-porn, then what is? Full frontal nudity? Actual penetration? S&M?"

I am only "defining deviancy downward" if I (not you) consider the nude female body to be "deviant," which I do not.

Depending on the venue, full frontal nudity MAY be considered soft porn. In other venues, it is art - in others still, it could be educational. For a billboard, that poster is sexy, not pornographic.

Also, I have three children - daughters, aged 26 and 18, and a son, aged 22. The eldest daughter has some reknown as a stage actress and model in the mid-Atlantic states. My point is this: I've raised three children,...and my views on what constitutes porn, soft or otherwise, haven't changed through the process.

[NCPAC]

I do respect your viewpoint, Pyro - just don't agree with it. I am happy that you and I, at least, have been able to keep this civil!

[steve-b]

If this is not soft-porn, then what is?

The accepted definition of "soft porn" is depiction of sexual activity short of penetration.

Your definitions of "soft porn", "alone", "sex", "is", etc, are not relevant.

[BrooklynGOP]

Oh, man.. I am just teasing... Why are you so defensive anyway? ;)

[End Times Sentinel]

As the Founding Director of Operation Porn Lift, in which I e mail pornographic jpgs to American Service members  serving in islamic countries, I would firstly like to say that yes, this definitely qualifies as porn.  Good quality porn.  Nice professional lighting, and top shelf models.  Yes this is porn and fine porn it is.

The second issue is should this be displayed near a mosque?  To this I say most definitely.  There are places where porn is appropriate (In private, at work on the internet, etc.) and places it is not (around children, waiting for jury duty, etc.). 

Porn can do many things, titillate, expand horizons, serve as a proxy partner, or offend mongrel savages from the eighth century who have no business walking around civilized people without being on the end of a leash. 

In fact, it not only titillates and offends, but it serves a third purpose in reminding muslims that their women are so ugly that they have to walk around in head to toe bags so as not to disgust others.

Owl_Eagle

”Guns Before Butter.”

[tjwmason]

This just confirms that a few centuries ago, the Atlantic acted as a diffusion filter through which sheeple did not readily pass. An unfortunate side effect of modern technology was to degrade this effect.

I am not quite sure what that means; other than that you cannot think of a sane response, and thus must attempt to throw random garbage in place of an argument. But, still, let's have a little look at a few centuries ago (which is necessarily before the American revolution, for what its worth).

A few centuries ago England was a Christian country. Some of our chaps (I suppose one might call them sheeple if one wanted to be offensive without actually making any reasonable point) left, and formed a country which, though never formally Christian (though some of its constituent parts retained established churches for a while), had a clear majority of Christians, and allowed Christian morality to guide them. Then they allowed some judicial fascists to take over, and to impose the minority view of public life as a 'religion-free zone'.

That was their choice, they choose a particular road on which to travel, and far be it for a foreigner to tell them not to continue. But the English homeland remained, and still remains a Christian land in law, and far be it for them to impose their views on us either.

In other words. Sort yourselves out before telling this Christian land that it should join you in state-mandated saecularism.

[jmc813]

No cleavage, no skirt above the knee, etc.

I really hope that you're a woman.

[jmc813]

The eldest daughter has some reknown as a stage actress and model in the mid-Atlantic states.

Pics?

Just kidding, just kidding.

[jmc813]

As the Founding Director of Operation Porn Lift, in which I e mail pornographic jpgs to American Service members serving in islamic countries

You, sir, rock.

[Pyro7480]

Check out my profile for your answer. I pray that God gives you the grace to see the sin in the way women dress these days.

[jmc813]

Check out my profile for your answer.

I did. Kudos first of all for having such strong pro-life values at such an early age.

Anyhow, I just find it hard to imagine a dude preferring not to see cleavage and thighs. Maybe I just really like cleavage and thighs.

[Pyro7480]

I like seeing them, but I'd prefer to only see them on my future wife, if I end up getting married. People often emphasize "physical" virginity, but hardly anyone these days are "spiritual" virgins too. For the Lord says, "Anyone who looks at a woman with lust in his heart commits adultery."

[headsonpikes]

Jimmuh?

[Valadin]

It would be a good start!!!lol

[steve-b]

Sort yourselves out

We have.

Sufficiently to rescue your sorry butts.

Twice (going on three times).

[steve-b]

I just find it hard to imagine a dude preferring not to see cleavage and thighs.

Maybe Harvey Fierstein or Barney Frank or somebody can explain it.

[SoIA-79]

'No cleavage, no skirt above the knee, etc.'

You can't see any cleavage, and as their not wearing skirts in any relation to their knees they seem to fit into the 'eternal standards'

[SoIA-79]

I have noticed a tendency among some Christians to act like they believe that the Islamics are right and Western civilization is indeed the slimey crud-hole OBL and his ilk say it is. It is disturbing at the very least.

Look up Pat Buchanan's article 'What do we offer the world'
for a prime example of this.

[Steel and Fire and Stone]

The accepted definition of "soft porn" is depiction of sexual activity short of penetration.

Perhaps. Who's "accepted definition"? Is that a legal definition? What's the source?

Your definitions of "soft porn", "alone", "sex", "is", etc, are not relevant.

Perhaps not to you. Fortunately, you are neither King nor God.

FReegards.. SFS