Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies.
Locked on 01/30/2010 4:51:35 PM PST by Admin Moderator, reason:

Get over your obsession already.



Skip to comments.

It's Always the Family - Whoever said that pornography is a victimless crime?
New Oxford Review ^ | January-February 2010

Posted on 01/28/2010 10:41:12 AM PST by GonzoII

It's Always the Family

January-February 2010

Whoever said that pornography is a victimless crime?

"The family is usually the first to suffer from pornography," said Pope John Paul II in an address to the Religious Alliance Against Pornography back in 1992. "Con­sequently," he continued, "as the primary cell of society, the family must be the first to champion the battle against this evil."

It is apt, then, that the Family Research Council would authorize a study on "The Effects of Pornography on Individuals, Marriage, Family and Community," released this past November.

By 1992 the porn industry in the U.S. was firmly established, having emerged from the seedy, back-alley urban environs to which it was largely confined in the 1970s. The home-video boom of the 1980s (of which porn was arguably the cause) offered Americans the opportunity to welcome porn discreetly into their own bedrooms. Still, when John Paul identified it as a "serious threat to society as a whole," porn had yet to burgeon into the mammoth industry it now is.


The decade of the 1990s marked the beginning of the current golden age of pornography. Pornographic culture rippled all the way into the Oval Office, resulting in the impeachment of President Bill Clinton. And once the Internet took hold of our daily lives (thanks, Al Gore), pornography became America's open secret. Indeed, it could be argued that pornography fueled the success of the 1990s Internet boom.

(Excerpt) Read more at newoxfordreview.org ...


TOPICS: Moral Issues
KEYWORDS: addiction; family; moralabsolutes; porn; pornography; research; researh; sex
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-98 next last
 Who is like unto God?........ Lk:10:18:
 And he said to them: I saw Satan like lightning falling from heaven.
1 posted on 01/28/2010 10:41:13 AM PST by GonzoII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

Since a study showed that every single man with internet access has looked at porn, I guess the family is doing okay. Remember, your pastor has internet access.


2 posted on 01/28/2010 10:48:48 AM PST by domenad (In all things, in all ways, at all times, let honor guide me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

1) I do not condone pornography, but I do condone freedom. Therefore I do not support laws against pornography.

2) The problem isn’t usually pornography as much as it is addiction to it. In that case, addiction of all sorts have destroyed families, including lottery addiction. You usually aren’t addicted to GOOD things, but I still have a problem with making everything that SOME get addicted to illegal. I know plenty of people out there are alcoholics, but I don’t support prohibition.


3 posted on 01/28/2010 10:51:16 AM PST by autumnraine (You can't fix stupid, but you can vote it out!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: autumnraine

3) Humans get addicted to the darndest things.


4 posted on 01/28/2010 10:53:53 AM PST by corkoman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

You knew of course an anti-porn article would be flame-broiled as soon as you posted it, right?


5 posted on 01/28/2010 10:54:37 AM PST by Responsibility2nd (Free Republic. The BEST place anywhere to PIMP YOUR BLOG)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

I’m going to get flamed but since we blame the Individual for a murder rather then the weapon, why should we blame porn for the psychological issues of an individual??


6 posted on 01/28/2010 10:56:21 AM PST by Le Chien Rouge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coleus; Salvation

Ping


7 posted on 01/28/2010 10:56:28 AM PST by Tired of Taxes (Dad, I will always think of you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah

Ping... this may be of interest.


8 posted on 01/28/2010 11:00:55 AM PST by Tired of Taxes (Dad, I will always think of you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

There’s a pretty simple fix for this problem, ladies.


9 posted on 01/28/2010 11:05:36 AM PST by Uncle Miltie (Liberal Massachussetts says: "FUBO!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Miltie

geez - don’t encourage my wife to put out my eyes, please....


10 posted on 01/28/2010 11:08:25 AM PST by Hegewisch Dupa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: autumnraine

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r0q_VGacfNk


11 posted on 01/28/2010 11:08:58 AM PST by MrEdd (Heck? Geewhiz Cripes, thats the place where people who don't believe in Gosh think they aint going.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

Um...It’s not a crime, period.


12 posted on 01/28/2010 11:10:34 AM PST by Wolfie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: autumnraine
"1) I do not condone pornography, but I do condone freedom. Therefore I do not support laws against pornography."

I think a deep understanding of human nature makes it easier for one to condone anti porn laws. BTW alcohol is not intrinsically evil, porn is.

13 posted on 01/28/2010 11:11:12 AM PST by GonzoII ("That they may be one...Father")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Tired of Taxes

I’ll ping it out a little later today when I have time - the porn promoters are already here, I see.


14 posted on 01/28/2010 11:19:15 AM PST by little jeremiah (Asato Ma Sad Gamaya Tamaso Ma Jyotir Gamaya)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: autumnraine
1) I do not condone pornography, but I do condone freedom. Therefore I do not support laws against pornography.

Non sequitur. Using that logic, this statement is also possible:

"I do not condone child pornography, but I do condone freedom. Therefore, I do not support laws against child pornography."
15 posted on 01/28/2010 11:19:26 AM PST by Antoninus (The RNC's dream ticket: Romney / Scozzafava 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: MrEdd

Sad situation, Mr Edd, I didn’t realize HOW sad though.


16 posted on 01/28/2010 11:21:10 AM PST by GonzoII ("That they may be one...Father")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII
BTW alcohol is not intrinsically evil, porn is.

What is intrinsically evil about willing adults watching each other have sex?

17 posted on 01/28/2010 11:25:48 AM PST by Lurker (The avalanche has begun. The pebbles no longer have a vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus

I’m pretty sure autumnraine was talking about consenting adults, not children.


18 posted on 01/28/2010 11:33:34 AM PST by Michael Barnes (Call me when the bullets start flying.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Lurker

“You have heard that it was said to those of old, “You shall not commit adultery,’ But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.” Mathew 5:27

Well, if you believe Jesus just said these things to be mean and deprive us of our fun, you’d just ignore it.

However, if you believe He loves us and wants us to be happy, you’d realize that this sin is extremely bad for mankind.


19 posted on 01/28/2010 11:37:49 AM PST by Persevero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Persevero
Well, if you believe Jesus just said these things to be mean and deprive us of our fun, you’d just ignore it.

You can follow Jesus if you wish, that's your right.

It's not your right to force others to follow Him. It's called "liberty". You might want to look into it.

If you don't want to partake of erotic films, that's also your right. It's not your right to use the force of Law to prevent my wife and I from enjoying them in the privacy of our own home.

Everyone involved is a consenting adult so that quite frankly makes it none of your business.

20 posted on 01/28/2010 11:42:11 AM PST by Lurker (The avalanche has begun. The pebbles no longer have a vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Michael Barnes
I’m pretty sure autumnraine was talking about consenting adults, not children.

Oh yes? Who decides if and when one is a "consenting adult"? Or is one a criminal pervert if he views porn involving a girl 17 years and 364 days old, but a perfectly righteous gentleman if the girl is one day older?

And what if the porn in question was filmed in a place where the "age of consent" is 12? Is it still your God-given right to view it?

The point is, the term "consenting adult" is completely arbitrary and mostly meaningless in this context. Viewing pornography is immoral regardless of the age of subject.
21 posted on 01/28/2010 11:54:44 AM PST by Antoninus (The RNC's dream ticket: Romney / Scozzafava 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Lurker
It's not your right to force others to follow Him. It's called "liberty". You might want to look into it.

Is that so. OK, how about this. Let's say a town decides it's going to be porn-free. The citizens vote in favor of the no-porn ordinance and the local government enforces it. Do you believe that a few porn-hounds in the city have the right to call in federal government to have the ordinance overturned?

Simply put, do you think you have a God-given right to view pornography?
22 posted on 01/28/2010 11:58:28 AM PST by Antoninus (The RNC's dream ticket: Romney / Scozzafava 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus
Um excuse the intrusion, but your post made little sense. You asked, “Simply put, do you think you have a God-given right to view pornography?” But the previous verbiage posited an ‘unto Caesar, from Caesar, for Caesar’ scenario. I mean, the community has a right to write law based upon the community values, else you are no longer sovereigns of your community. Yet what you tried to posit was a transmogrification of unalienable rights and community sovereignty. Want to try again?
23 posted on 01/28/2010 12:04:27 PM PST by MHGinTN (Obots, believing they cannot be deceived, it is impossible to convince them when they are deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus
Let's say a town decides it's going to be porn-free. The citizens vote in favor of the no-porn ordinance and the local government enforces it.

How would such an ordinance be enforced? Would the local Police Dept demand access to my home to make sure it's porn free? Would the town somehow monitor what I get from DirectTV? Would they be opening my mail to see what movies I've ordered?

How will the Town Council decide what is and what is not 'porn'? Will they keep a list or will they have some criteria? Will they come up with some kind of Porn Matrix?

Do you believe that a few porn-hounds in the city have the right to call in federal government to have the ordinance overturned?

Absolutely.

24 posted on 01/28/2010 12:12:42 PM PST by Lurker (The avalanche has begun. The pebbles no longer have a vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus

That is so not even the same, I don’t know how you could possibly think so. Condoning freedom is NOT condoning child abuse. Talk about non-sequitor!


25 posted on 01/28/2010 12:41:45 PM PST by autumnraine (You can't fix stupid, but you can vote it out!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: All
"This powerful video is in loving memory of hundreds of dead porn stars. This video is dedicated to porn stars still alive. My hope is this video will touch many lives and they will stop viewing and doing porn. www.shelleylubben.com to hear more from ex porn stars. "

Dead Porn Stars Memorial www.shelleylubben.com [VIDEO]

slubben - October 07, 2008


26 posted on 01/28/2010 12:41:53 PM PST by GonzoII ("That they may be one...Father")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: domenad

***Since a study showed that every single man with internet access has looked at porn***

And sometimes it comes looking for you! Once, at work, I checked out Drudge Report. There was an interesting link to a news story and when I clicked on it I GOT AN EYE FULL and it wasn’t news!

Because such a thing could get a person immediatly fired I closed the page out and shut down the computer!

Later at home, I brought up Drudge and the link was gone. How it slipped by our company’s filters I don’t know.


27 posted on 01/28/2010 1:12:29 PM PST by Ruy Dias de Bivar (Compasion overload can wait! People need help NOW!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Lurker

I think the degeneration of society, corruption of morals, and objectification of persons is my business.

I don’t live in a vacuum.


28 posted on 01/28/2010 1:29:13 PM PST by Persevero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Tired of Taxes; 185JHP; 230FMJ; 69ConvertibleFirebird; Albion Wilde; Aleighanne; Alexander Rubin; ..
Here we go.

Moral Absolutes Ping!

Freepmail wagglebee or DirtyHarryY2K to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.

FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]

A few thoughts, and will also re-post my "Two religions of the world" comment below.

Okay, so consenting adults are fine. How many are non-consenting? I've read plenty about girls abudcted or forced into prostitution. Porn is prostituion on video. Maybe it's not always consenting.

Where to draw the line? Some people want to watch humans and animals. There is no logical reason not to, if "regular" porn is okay.

What about S&M? If they're consenting, why not? And how bizarre can the S&M get? The argument that "some people want to watch it" and "consenting" leaves no argument against the most hellish and disgusting things.

Well, how about necrophilia? Actually in Portland, OR about 15 years ago someone did post some necrophilia action on Community Access TV. It took the city a while to find some legal loophole to remove it. If the deceased had left it in their will that necrophilia was fine with them, and they got deceased in a natural way (of course, on OR it could be doc assisted suicide!), than there is no logical argment against necrophilia.

And the argument "we want it so we must have it" leads to easily available porn on TV that kids can easily - and do - get ahold of. Then the argument is "well, parents have to control their kids. We want it 24/7, so we get to have it 24/7".

My argument is below, but here is another one as well:

When you live in a garbage dump, no matter how clean you keep your own house, flies, rats, stink and disease will enter your home. Hedonists are turning the entire world into a garbage dump and their argument is "clean your own house then". Let them do their dirt in the closets and leave the rest of the world alone. They don't own the world. Although they're trying to. Plus, the argument that everyone watches porn is a lie.

29 posted on 01/28/2010 1:38:09 PM PST by little jeremiah (Asato Ma Sad Gamaya Tamaso Ma Jyotir Gamaya)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus

What do you think of this? I wrote it a few days ago and posted it on two or three threads that needed it.

If we take the word “religion” to be mean a belief system and world view determined by said belief system*, there are two religions in the world. Everyone, regardless of label, falls into one category or another**.

1. Those who not only believe in God, but accept and try to follow the rules set out in the scriptures of the world; which are, in the main, largely in agreement over the basic rules of morality, behavior and values for human society. For instance, prohibitions of sex before and outside of marriage, against homosexual acts, against murder, theft, false witness, blasphemy, and so on. And finer concepts as avoiding lust, greed, anger, envy, covetousness, and so on.

Another aspect of this meaning of religion is the world view that this mortal world is not our eternal home, but a sort of testing ground; with the real home in the eternal Kingdom of God, and that true happiness can be found only in relationship with the Supreme Godhead.

2. The other world view and belief system is based on atheism, hedonism and moral relativity - which is based on hypocrisy, since what it really means is that only their view point is valid.

This world view is not just espoused by outright atheists*** but many who claim to believe in “God” - but the “God” they supposedly worship does not have the actual qualities of God. For instance, various denominations who allow homosexuals to be priests and ministers, consider abortion perfectly okay, and so on. Up to the Metropolitan Community “Church” that is focused solely on homosexuality, or Jeremiah Wright’s Trinity Church which is merely a racist and marxist political group using sort of Christian sounding slogans occasionally.

Religion #2 views this world as all in all, and seeks to find perfection in this world; perfection in their eyes meaning the most enjoyment possible (in their view) before the worms take over. “Eat, drink and be merry, for tomorrow you die”. There is no God in control (other than a superficial label pinned on), you make your own rules, each sees his own desires and whims as the guiding light in life, or the whims of others who have similar values and world view.

The really bad news is that Religion #2 is completely intolerant of any of the viewpoints, morality or world view of religion #1 having any sway in public life. They pretend that there is “neutral ground” for public life, and that Religion #1 should not have influence over public policy, in supposed deference to “secularism” or “neutrality”.

But, the problem is that there are only two world views, or two religions. If theists cannot influence public life, than atheism and hedonism are the standard. There can only be one standard, there is no neutral ground.

* Of course, there are other meanings of the word “religion” but leaving that for another day.

** I am also leaving Islam aside for now as that is a whole ‘nother category in a sense. Or a subset.

*** An interesting point is that there atheists who are content to live in a world peopled by group #1 with the morals and values of group #1. Such atheists are another subset. :-)


30 posted on 01/28/2010 1:45:32 PM PST by little jeremiah (Asato Ma Sad Gamaya Tamaso Ma Jyotir Gamaya)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Persevero
I think the degeneration of society, corruption of morals, and objectification of persons is my business.

Never said it wasn't. You're free to use the power of persuasion until the cows come home. What you're not free to do is use the force of the State to impose your will.

It's also very instructive that you didn't answer a single one of the questions I posed.

31 posted on 01/28/2010 1:53:33 PM PST by Lurker (The avalanche has begun. The pebbles no longer have a vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Lurker

Feel free to (try to) prove either of my posts above wrong.


32 posted on 01/28/2010 1:58:46 PM PST by little jeremiah (Asato Ma Sad Gamaya Tamaso Ma Jyotir Gamaya)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah
Feel free to (try to) prove either of my posts above wrong.

They're irrelevant to the discussion at hand.

33 posted on 01/28/2010 2:00:38 PM PST by Lurker (The avalanche has begun. The pebbles no longer have a vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus

Yup...porn destroys souls. It should never have been legalized.

America would have been so much better off if the Supreme Court hadn’t legalized that stuff when all those cases came up in the ‘50’s & ‘60’s, I Am Curious Yellow, Howl, The Green Door, etc.

Ed


34 posted on 01/28/2010 2:13:35 PM PST by Sir_Ed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Lurker

They are indeed relevant.

Did you even read them?


35 posted on 01/28/2010 2:14:56 PM PST by little jeremiah (Asato Ma Sad Gamaya Tamaso Ma Jyotir Gamaya)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: MrEdd

wow...that video is powerful. Tons of young lives wasted in that industry....incredible...I imagine the producers welcome their new stars into the business but try and not get attached to them.


36 posted on 01/28/2010 2:16:17 PM PST by oust the louse (The Country has a very bad BO problem...let's use some RIGHT guard!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah

Yes I did and no it isn’t.


37 posted on 01/28/2010 2:29:04 PM PST by Lurker (The avalanche has begun. The pebbles no longer have a vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Lurker

My arguments below are indeed relevant and you are avoiding addressing them.

Okay, so consenting adults are fine. How many are non-consenting? I’ve read plenty about girls abudcted or forced into prostitution. Porn is prostituion on video. Maybe it’s not always consenting.

Where to draw the line? Some people want to watch humans and animals. There is no logical reason not to, if “regular” porn is okay.

What about S&M? If they’re consenting, why not? And how bizarre can the S&M get? The argument that “some people want to watch it” and “consenting” leaves no argument against the most hellish and disgusting things.

Well, how about necrophilia? Actually in Portland, OR about 15 years ago someone did post some necrophilia action on Community Access TV. It took the city a while to find some legal loophole to remove it. If the deceased had left it in their will that necrophilia was fine with them, and they got deceased in a natural way (of course, on OR it could be doc assisted suicide!), than there is no logical argment against necrophilia.

And the argument “we want it so we must have it” leads to easily available porn on TV that kids can easily - and do - get ahold of. Then the argument is “well, parents have to control their kids. We want it 24/7, so we get to have it 24/7”.


38 posted on 01/28/2010 2:32:50 PM PST by little jeremiah (Asato Ma Sad Gamaya Tamaso Ma Jyotir Gamaya)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: autumnraine
The problem isn’t usually pornography as much as it is addiction to it. In that case, addiction of all sorts have destroyed families, including lottery addiction. You usually aren’t addicted to GOOD things, but I still have a problem with making everything that SOME get addicted to illegal. I know plenty of people out there are alcoholics, but I don’t support prohibition.

Good point, autumnraine.

39 posted on 01/28/2010 3:40:14 PM PST by GOPJ (Happy Anniversary Barack! - - - Love, Massachusetts - - - FreeperGOPsterinMA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Lurker

—”You can follow Jesus if you wish, that’s your right.

It’s not your right to force others to follow Him. It’s called “liberty”. You might want to look into it.

If you don’t want to partake of erotic films, that’s also your right. It’s not your right to use the force of Law to prevent my wife and I from enjoying them in the privacy of our own home.

Everyone involved is a consenting adult so that quite frankly makes it none of your business. “—

I don’t see any questions in there. Maybe you are thinking of someone else.


40 posted on 01/28/2010 3:49:50 PM PST by Persevero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Persevero

It’s not your right to use the force of Law to prevent my wife and I from enjoying them in the privacy of our own home.?

Actually, if there are laws that would prevent you and your wife from enjoying XXX film in the privacy of our own home, then it would be her right.It would be nosey, bussybody,rude, prudish, and probably because she had a lousy sex life herself, but a right.


41 posted on 01/28/2010 4:00:57 PM PST by philetus (Keep doing what you always do and you'll keep getting what you always get.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Persevero

Wikipedia’s entry on serial killers notes:

“From an early age, many are intensely interested in voyeurism, fetishism, and sadomasochistic pornography.”

Fantasies do affect behavior, by altering sexual preferences. In the normal progression of the addiction, pornography addicts eventually act out their fantasies. Law enforcement authorities find evidence of ties between pornography and individuals engaging in sex crimes in eight out of 10 cases.

From Stanley Rachman The Psychological Record, 1968:

“According to Dr. Victor Cline, who has treated more than 3,000 sex addicts and sexual offenders, the common course of unchecked porn addiction advances from addiction to escalation to desensitization to acting out.

Masturbation to deviant images is a surefire means of acquiring a deviant sexual compulsion or fetish. Stanley Rachman demonstrated in the laboratory how sexual deviations could be created in adult male subjects. He was able to condition, in two separate experiments, 100 percent of his male subjects into a sexual deviancy (fetishism).*”

From UnitedFamilies.org:

“Pornographers have not made adequate attempts to minimize the exposure of minors to obscenity. Children are viewed as current porn consumers.

Scores of online pornographers have embedded the names of popular children’s toys in their websites so that Internet users are directed to their site when searching for toys.

Most children have encountered online porn and one in five has been sexually propositioned by adults or other children forwarding porn to them.

Some children’s websites are besieged by pop-up ads for adult sites. It is not uncommon for “children’s” video games to feature pimps, prostitutes and full nudity. (my kids have been treated to full on porn ads popping up on my computer - Persevero)

Boys in the 12-to-17 age range constitute pornography’s largest consumer group. It is not then surprising that the number of treatment centers for juvenile sex offenders has risen exponentially in recent years.


42 posted on 01/28/2010 4:01:29 PM PST by Persevero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: philetus

I agree that you and your wife can do what you want together.

I’d draw the line at commerce of pornographic images. See my post above for a few of the reasons.


43 posted on 01/28/2010 4:02:55 PM PST by Persevero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Persevero
“Pornographers have not made adequate attempts to minimize the exposure of minors to obscenity.

That's not their responsibility. And who gets to define 'adequate'?

Scores of online pornographers have embedded the names of popular children’s toys in their websites so that Internet users are directed to their site when searching for toys.

Give me a list of names of websites that do that.

Most children have encountered online porn and one in five has been sexually propositioned by adults or other children forwarding porn to them.

Source?

Some children’s websites are besieged by pop-up ads for adult sites.

Which ones? (my kids have been treated to full on porn ads popping up on my computer - Persevero)

Pretty irresponsible parenting if you ask me. My kids computer has free a filter on it so that stuff doesn't happen.

Boys in the 12-to-17 age range constitute pornography’s largest consumer group.

Source?

44 posted on 01/28/2010 4:44:53 PM PST by Lurker (The avalanche has begun. The pebbles no longer have a vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII; informavoracious; larose; RJR_fan; Prospero; Conservative Vermont Vet; ...
+

Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:

Add me / Remove me

Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.

45 posted on 01/28/2010 5:20:42 PM PST by narses ("lex orandi, lex credendi, lex vivendi")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

Marking this article for later reading. A quick skim showed the usual liberaltarians showed up.


46 posted on 01/28/2010 5:46:23 PM PST by Pinkbell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah
Good points.

Porn can be an addiction, and I know of alot of people whose lives have been shattered by it.

47 posted on 01/28/2010 5:51:03 PM PST by redgolum ("God is dead" -- Nietzsche. "Nietzsche is dead" -- God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Lurker; Antoninus

Interesting. So, a local government cannot implement a law againt vice, but the federal government can use the force of arms in defense of vice.

That is freedom?


48 posted on 01/28/2010 7:15:38 PM PST by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Lurker

I named all my sources in my post, already.


49 posted on 01/28/2010 7:45:52 PM PST by Persevero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII
enter the Table of Contents of the Catechism of the Catholic Church here
 
2779 Before we make our own this first exclamation of the Lord's Prayer, we must humbly cleanse our hearts of certain false images drawn "from this world." Humility makes us recognize that "no one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and anyone to whom the Son chooses to reveal him," that is, "to little children." The purification of our hearts has to do with paternal or maternal images, stemming from our personal and cultural history, and influencing our relationship with God. God our Father transcends the categories of the created world. To impose our own ideas in this area "upon him" would be to fabricate idols to adore or pull down. To pray to the Father is to enter into his mystery as he is and as the Son has revealed him to us.

The expression God the Father had never been revealed to anyone. When Moses himself asked God who he was, he heard another name. The Father's name has been revealed to us in the Son, for the name "Son" implies the new name "Father."

50 posted on 01/28/2010 8:03:20 PM PST by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-98 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson