Posted on 05/24/2005 1:42:28 PM PDT by CHARLITE
Uhh...I'm a guy...my 14th anniversery is barely a month away, and I'm not agreeing with you. I still think you're rationalizing your choice of behaviors. If I were you, and I liked porn, I'd just admit it.
I am beginning to think your efforts, mine, and those of others are doomed to be in vain.
is there a term for someone "addicted to" logical fallacy?
You're going to be oddly perplexed when you find out your "Republican Only" anti-porn crusade is peopled with nanny-state leftists, being led into battle by hairy-armpitted feminist harridans.
Dubya has stated repeatedly (in his own words) that the US is multi religious society.
I encourage you to fully embrace your beliefs. But legislating for everyone to abide by your belief system is Talibanesque.
The Almighty gave us all free will. I refuse to allow anyone to take it away.
You are equating married sex with porn addiction.
Here it is; sex isn't a spectator sport. Porn is empty, dominates the addict, who cannot say No.
Oh, and the people who truly believe they are going to hell for missing mass on one Sunday are not totally addicted to religion?????
Its the same psychology. You can enjoy something without being addicted to it and having it run your life.
another good point, also probably in vain.
the real issue is supposedly christian charitable fraud organizations constantly demonizing activites they don't approve of (sins of the flesh), and use FEAR and DAMNATION exaggerations, in order to RAISE MONEY and build a bigger organization... with job security for the spongers of society.
The WORST day on the planet for employees and execs who run the "Cancer.. bla bla" organizations of American, will be the day that CANCER bites the dust...
no more excuses to blizzard us with their urgent pleas for more money to do research. to pass more smoking laws, to do whatever it is that any particular 'sin' prevention organization is in the BUSINESS of exploiting to rake money in at the expense of the stupid idiotic dupes that support them.
All of these 'temperance' non-profit groups, are frauds and OUGHT to be put out of business and treated like the grifters they are...
Porn is in the eye of the beholder... and the "I know it when I see it" folks, are full of blubber. Because EVERYWHERE they look, THEY SEE IT. Swimsuits, miniskirts, tank tops, stockings, miracle bras, sports illustrated mags, probably even national geographic.
They see a pedophile behind the sale of every pair of five inch stilleto heels. They need to be defunded legally before they nanny state us to death.
"Women are forbidden from wearing patent leather shoes, lest men see reflections of their underwear. (Cleveland)"
http://www.bitoffun.com/stupid_laws_Ohio.htm
(stupid laws website.)
the "strange bedfellows" barb clamors to be hurled, don't it?
Read my earlier post, I told you I don't mind it. I also don't think Congress has any business wasting time on this other than that which concerns child porn.
Porn requires LOOKING and you have to admit, there is a level of LUST in order to LOOK
Ok, you're just getting silly now. I haven't agreed with chris1 much in this thread myself, but you're getting way out of your league by trying to tell him what he needs to do in his marriage. You don't know him, you don't know his wife, you don't know jack about the situation. You're getting waaaaaay to personal with the guy when you start talking about what he knows about "his woman".
Tragically, they also don't seem to be able to distinguish between porno and the love act established by God that is reserved solely for a husband and his wife.
As you inferred, it's difficult to have an intellectually honest discussion with 'em.
That's correct. Read more about this deadly toxic plague on humanity here.
Ahh, isn't that typical...Christian doesn't mean Chatholic...NOt all Christians are Catholics and visa versa.
Gee, I can't fathom why your wife might find you unattractive. You sound like such an attentive and considerate lover. /sarcasm.
Couldn't it just be that they genuinely disagree with you? Occam was a smart guy.
Once again, a specious argument that detracts from your credibility. Let's follow the logic: if one hides something (or more accurately, is disinclined to do it in front of their children and grandchildren), then it must be because it is immoral and spawns guilt.
I do not go to the bathroom in front of my children. I do not shower in front of my children. I do not have sex in front of my children (even when I was married and the sex was "legitimate".) I do not pick my nose or fart or belch or pick my toes or my navel or do my taxes in front of my children.
There are certain activities that belong in the adult realm, or at least the private one. Privacy does not equate to guilt, although certainly guilt could be one reason for desiring privacy. But simple modesty may be another. Or respect for another's sensibilities.
YOU may feel guilty about porn or sex. But it is specious (and a conceit) to extend that sentiment to everyone else.
They have medication for that kind of chronic paranoia. AND hatred.
There you go. Now you're satan too.
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.