Wednesday, December 09, 2009

Pornography: the family killer

If anyone thinks the attempts by GLSEN and our safe schools Czar to introduce school children to pornography are harmless, they should check out the Townhall article on the devastating effects of pornography.

Not that I am under any illusion that this article would change their minds. Years ago the Surgeon General produced a huge volume on the damaging effects of hard-core pornography and it was pretty much ignored.

Of course, defenders of pornography really don't care about scientific studies or evidence or even the terrible consequences. They just care about their own gratification.


Jane Doe said...

Honestly this appears to be just one more exaggerated attempt to place restrictions on an individual’s Constitutional Rights. In the 1969 Supreme Court case, Stanley v. Georgia §394 U.S. 557 it was determined that pornographic material kept in the privacy of your domicile cannot be defined as a criminal offense, as they are protected under the assumed right to privacy found in the 1st and 14th Amendments. If one finds the content of this article upsetting they should take the time to appeal the law, versus writing online alarmist rants. Families where pornography is an issue, most likely needed to be in marriage counseling prior to the first playboy magazine purchase. In fact the 40% divorce rate observed in homes where one person has an addiction to pornography is skewed. The addiction may have been developed as a means of mental/ emotional escape from a bad marriage. This same train of thought would explain decreases in sexual intimacy, since emotional turmoil dose little for one’s libido. Instead of wasting time on pornographic material addictions, the government should invest in family counseling vouchers. It appears the pornography is just the effect of a bad marriage; if you fix the marital issues children will be stable and pornography will not be purchased.

Dennis said...

Ms. Doe,

First, we're not talking about material viewed in the privacy of one's own home. We're talking about obscene material that is promoted by GLSEN (and GLSEN's founder who is now Obama's safe schools Czar!) and has been taught to kids in educational settings. It has very damaging effects on kids and other human beings.

Second, perhaps you didn't read the original post about the material GLSEN is promoting. We're not just talking about some bare breasts in Playboy. They are promoting sex between children and sex between children and adults! They're talking about homosexual practices like "fisting" or urinating/deficating on people for sexual pleasure.

Third, I will grant your contention that pornography addiction can be the result of a bad marriage but bad marriages can also be the result of pornography addiction. It can go both ways, like alcoholism. And like alcoholism, either way, it is destructive.

Fourth, regarding your argument that the government should not "waste" time on pornographic material addictions but provide family counseling vouchers instead. This is a little like having the government promote alcoholism in public schools and then using tax money to provide counseling vouchers to alcoholics!

Fifth, Regarding your statement that "if you fix the marital issues children will be stable and pornography will not be purchased: When kids go to schools where the GLSEN reading materials are promoted, and kids attend sex education classes where exploration into "alternative lifestyles" is encouraged, and where parent's values are undermined, and then the kids have to face the peer pressure of "everyone is doing it", and you add unto that the easy availability of pornography and the hormones especially of young males--you view that "if you fix the marital issue children will be stable and pornography will not be purchased, is simply not true.

Finally, sometimes it takes these "alarmist rants" to wake people up to the need to change/repeal/enact some laws.

Thanks for your post.