porn

[clem456]

**My understanding is that things like porn and masterbation are sexual addictions. Not a normal act like most people think it would be. **We really shouldn’t be tempted by these things if we were normal but we aren’t. When I look at a woman I see a person. I usually look right though the looks. That doesn’t mean I can’t see but I consider such things as illusion or a concoction of one’s own mind.

Have to be careful in how this plays out. An addict will use the addiction to mitigate culpability and responsibility. We always have a moral choice to make. God determines the degree of culpability.

 

[Tyrion]

…your lack of knowledge and insight as to the motives of those that you state mutitlated statues is known only to them, unless you are able to read minds, and I doubt you do.

No need to read the minds. Taking a hammer and chisel to cut off the genitals of sculptures can only mean one thing.

If the Catholic Church is not an authority on pornography , then who is the authority on pornography ? To date, the poster quoted above would have us believe that he/she is that authority . . . :dts:

No one is. Just like there can be no authority on “what is a good dinner”, or “what position is good for love-making”. Inherently subjective actions cannot be decided by “authority”. As the old Latin saying goes: “De gustibus non est disputandum”, - “one cannot argue about taste”.

Just ponder for a second: there are people who consider Rodin’s beautiful sculpture “The Kiss” as porn.

 

[clem456]

No need to read the minds. Taking a hammer and chisel to cut off the genitals of sculptures can only mean one thing.

No one is. Just like there can be no authority on “what is a good dinner”, or “what position is good for love-making”. Inherently subjective actions cannot be decided by “authority”. As the old Latin saying goes: “De gustibus non est disputandum”, - “one cannot argue about taste”.

Just ponder for a second: there are people who consider Rodin’s beautiful sculpture “The Kiss” as porn.

Without getting into a huge discusssion here: the Church defines what morality is, as revealed to it, and interpreted by it. Only YOU know (and God) if you are within those standards or not. If you’re not abiding the Church’s authority, then whose? Ours? That is chaos and death (Gn 2:17).

Pornography is evil and immoral always and everywhere. Nude statues are not objectively immoral, but a person can be led to lust by them. Lust is immoral always and everywhere.

 

[beehumble]

I’m sure this question has been asked many times here. But I must ask is having a look at softcore porn a mortal sin. I would guess yes. I was doing really good and not being tempted and losing desire for masterbation which was only done to stop wet dreams. I’ve fell flat on my face now and don’t even feel like going to Mass. Could this be a test or what’s called the “dark night”?

B

You need to go to confession. Then go to Mass and receive. Then you should try fasting along with prayer (Jesus said sometimes fasting is needed along with prayer). Try bread (choose something good or that you like,such as plain croissants) and some beverage (preferably water but maybe coffee or soft drink if water is too difficult - no alcohol) - try this on Wednesdays and then later add Fridays if you can.

God bless you.

 

[Tyrion]

Without getting into a huge discusssion here: the Church defines what morality is, as revealed to it, and interpreted by it. Only YOU know (and God) if you are within those standards or not. If you’re not abiding the Church’s authority, then whose? Ours? That is chaos and death (Gn 2:17).

Mine, of course. It is well grounded in the principle of reciprocity, in other words the two variants of the golden rule.

Pornography is evil and immoral always and everywhere. Nude statues are not objectively immoral, but a person can be led to lust by them. Lust is immoral always and everywhere.

Since pornography is undefined, and cannot be defined, this assertion is pretty meaningless. Lust is defined, but the idea that it is immoral is only applicable to the ethical system of certain people.

 

[clem456]

Mine, of course. It is well grounded in the principle of reciprocity, in other words the two variants of the golden rule.

The golden rule is a good start, but to say the standards are yours makes your morality a personal morality. Doesn’t work too well.
Here is the catechism section with the Church’s view of morality:
vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s1c1a4.htm#II

.

Since pornography is undefined, and cannot be defined, this assertion is pretty meaningless. Lust is defined, but the idea that it is immoral is only applicable to the ethical system of certain people

I’m sorry, that’s not correct.
Suggested reading for the Catholic point of view:
Theology of the Body chapters 60-64

Or the Catechism

2351 Lust is disordered desire for or inordinate enjoyment of sexual pleasure. Sexual pleasure is morally disordered when sought for itself, isolated from its procreative and unitive purposes.

2352 By masturbation is to be understood the deliberate stimulation of the genital organs in order to derive sexual pleasure. "Both the Magisterium of the Church, in the course of a constant tradition, and the moral sense of the faithful have been in no doubt and have firmly maintained that masturbation is an intrinsically and gravely disordered action."138 “The deliberate use of the sexual faculty, for whatever reason, outside of marriage is essentially contrary to its purpose.” For here sexual pleasure is sought outside of "the sexual relationship which is demanded by the moral order and in which the total meaning of mutual self-giving and human procreation in the context of true love is achieved."139

To form an equitable judgment about the subjects’ moral responsibility and to guide pastoral action, one must take into account the affective immaturity, force of acquired habit, conditions of anxiety or other psychological or social factors that lessen, if not even reduce to a minimum, moral culpability.

2354 Pornography consists in removing real or simulated sexual acts from the intimacy of the partners, in order to display them deliberately to third parties. It offends against chastity because it perverts the conjugal act, the intimate giving of spouses to each other. It does grave injury to the dignity of its participants (actors, vendors, the public), since each one becomes an object of base pleasure and illicit profit for others. It immerses all who are involved in the illusion of a fantasy world. It is a grave offense. Civil authorities should prevent the production and distribution of pornographic materials.

 

[NeedImprovement]

This is where it can start coming out of both sides of the keyboard.

A :

. . . If the Catholic Church is not an authority on pornography , then who is the authority on pornography ? To date, the poster quoted above would have us believe that he/she is that authority . . . :dts:

B :

. . . No one is. Just like there can be no authority on “what is a good dinner” . . .

C:

Without getting into a huge discusssion here: the Church defines what morality is, as revealed to it, and interpreted by it. Only YOU know (and God) if you are within those standards or not. If you’re not abiding the Church’s authority, then whose? Ours? That is chaos and death (Gn 2:17).
. . .

D:

Mine, of course. It is well grounded in the principle of reciprocity, in other words the two variants of the golden rule.
. . .

Quote B = : There can be no authority on pornography, therefore morality is relative.
Quote D = : I am the authority on morality, therefore pornography is relative.
Therefore I am the authority on morality and on pornography.

Add to that, this same poster’s assertion that pornography cannot be defined, and the sum total we get contains less logic than a screen door on a submarine :

There can be no authority on pornography, yet I am the authority on pornography. Pornography cannot be defined – so I am the authority on something which cannot be defined.

:doh2:

Isn’t it strange how both medical science and the Catholic Church attest to the fact that a significant number of our fellow human beings are becoming and have become addicted to pornography , while another person carries around this totally unhinged idea that pornography cannot be defined. And yet the Church and medical science don’t seem to have a problem defining it ?

Everybody be sure to thank the pertinent poster for providing such a fine, working definition of moral relativism.
:tiphat:

 

[CopticChristian]

**No need to read the minds. Taking a hammer and chisel to cut off the genitals of sculptures can only mean one thing. **

No one is. Just like there can be no authority on “what is a good dinner”, or “what position is good for love-making”. Inherently subjective actions cannot be decided by “authority”. As the old Latin saying goes: “De gustibus non est disputandum”, - “one cannot argue about taste”.

Just ponder for a second: there are people who consider Rodin’s beautiful sculpture “The Kiss” as porn.

Tyrion,

The only thing it means is that someone took a hammer and chisel to a statue, anything beyond that is conjecture…

“you want the truth…you can’t handle the truth…Colonel…did you order the code red…your darn right I did and I’d do it again…”

 

[CopticChristian]

Mine, of course. It is well grounded in the principle of reciprocity, in other words the two variants of the golden rule.

Since pornography is undefined, and cannot be defined, this assertion is pretty meaningless. Lust is defined, but the idea that it is immoral is only applicable to the ethical system of certain people.

Tyrion,

You misapprorpiate the Golden rule…Christianity in the OHCAC is based on

Profession of Faith
Sacramental Life
Modeling Christ
Prayer

The golden rule is oriented towards modeling Christ and an ascent to Holiness in the context of the profession of Faith and the Sacramental life. To yank it out as something that you want to make it does not change that

Love God/Love neighbor is oriented towards modeling Christ. This is the bigger discussion that your point of view neglects…

In this context the authority is Christ…this you appear not to understand in the context of Morality…

 

[St_Hilary]

I’m sure this question has been asked many times here. But I must ask is having a look at softcore porn a mortal sin. I would guess yes. I was doing really good and not being tempted and losing desire for masterbation which was only done to stop wet dreams. I’ve fell flat on my face now and don’t even feel like going to Mass. Could this be a test or what’s called the “dark night”?

B

 

[St_Hilary]

It is not a metter of being in the dark, but a matter of immaturity.

You know and one does not have to be brilliant that watching those porn films is going to lead you into masturbation and many other impure acts.

So, why do you do this if you know it is wrong.

The reason for marriage is to multiply and grow (Not through pornography)

You have better stop this sinful action and get to oconfession now while you are still alive and God is full of grACE.

God bless you

 

[Tyrion]

The golden rule is a good start, but to say the standards are yours makes your morality a personal morality. Doesn’t work too well.

It sure works for me, and for all those whose ethical system is based upon this principle.

I’m sorry, that’s not correct.

Oh, anyone can claim that their “definition” is the real McCoy. Claims are dime a dozen. Even the members of the Supreme Court did not wish to tackle that problem, knowing full well that it cannot be solved. Porn is inherently subjective.

And yet the Church and medical science don’t seem to have a problem defining it ?

When and where did medical science define pornography? Link, please.

You misapprorpiate the Golden rule…

The golden rule is much older than christianity.

 

[billcu1]

This is where it can start coming out of both sides of the keyboard.

A :
B :

C:
D:

Quote B = : There can be no authority on pornography, therefore morality is relative.
Quote D = : I am the authority on morality, therefore pornography is relative.
Therefore I am the authority on morality and on pornography.

Add to that, this same poster’s assertion that pornography cannot be defined, and the sum total we get contains less logic than a screen door on a submarine :

There can be no authority on pornography, yet I am the authority on pornography. Pornography cannot be defined – so I am the authority on something which cannot be defined.

:doh2:

Isn’t it strange how both medical science and the Catholic Church attest to the fact that a significant number of our fellow human beings are becoming and have become addicted to pornography , while another person carries around this totally unhinged idea that pornography cannot be defined. And yet the Church and medical science don’t seem to have a problem defining it ?

Everybody be sure to thank the pertinent poster for providing such a fine, working definition of moral relativism.
:tiphat:

Could it be that porn is subjective and the law of grace defines what it is? Just philosophizing here. I agree our nature is sin nature.

 

[billcu1]

It is not a metter of being in the dark, but a matter of immaturity.

You know and one does not have to be brilliant that watching those porn films is going to lead you into masturbation and many other impure acts.

So, why do you do this if you know it is wrong.

The reason for marriage is to multiply and grow (Not through pornography)

You have better stop this sinful action and get to oconfession now while you are still alive and God is full of grACE.

God bless you

I had a materbation problem once and went to confession many times for it. It started unwinding. I had the feeling that it was habit. So I’ve been doing ok until lately.

 

[clem456]

It sure works for me, and for all those whose ethical system is based upon this principle.

Glad it’s working out for you. The problem is that you appropriate it as YOUR standards. You,as an individual. Morality is objective.

Oh, anyone can claim that their “definition” is the real McCoy. Claims are dime a dozen. Even the members of the Supreme Court did not wish to tackle that problem, knowing full well that it cannot be solved. Porn is inherently subjective.

See above as well as the 15 other posts above it. We are getting to the point where the discussion is not very fruitful.

When and where did medical science define pornography? Link, please.

The golden rule is much older than christianity

Right, God is eternal. God is the author of morality. God expresses himself through his one Church. Otherwise, any old interpretation would be sufficient, which is exactly the difficulty we have here.
The Church is clear on the definition of lust and pornography. What are you not hearing?

 

[clem456]

I had a materbation problem once and went to confession many times for it. It started unwinding. I had the feeling that it was habit. So I’ve been doing ok until lately.

Most people do not stop cold turkey for the rest of their lives. Everyone I know of backslides to some extent. The question is, what is the overall trajectory? Are you moving forward in the practice of virtue or stuck in the same behaviors and spiritual state?

 

[billcu1]

Most people do not stop cold turkey for the rest of their lives. Everyone I know of backslides to some extent. The question is, what is the overall trajectory? Are you moving forward in the practice of virtue or stuck in the same behaviors and spiritual state?

It hasn’t been very long that I’ve know softcore pornography was a mortal sin. I was told by my priest that having it on the computer was a mortal sin. If it popped up on the computer because I do not use a blocker or I entered a site name and was redirected to something pornographic that was not my doing. I have had masterbation problems and went to mass and it very like I was being cleaned so maybe that’s been a venial sin for me. I know masterbation varies in scope. I added prayer to my regimen and confessed masterbation and as I said the desire went somewhere. I just have been overwelmed lately. If I can’t get in Saturday for confession because I have transportation problems and can make it to weekly masses more easily I will make an appt for after monday afternoon mass for a confession.

Like I said it’s taken awhile for me to become overwelmed I got a distinct feeling of getting weaker since I haven’t been taking the host. I have asked if I could borrow the car to go to mass and been told no. I live with my mother and stepfather. These protestants don’t know how we see Mass as being our life.

 

[billcu1]

It is not a metter of being in the dark, but a matter of immaturity.

You know and one does not have to be brilliant that watching those porn films is going to lead you into masturbation and many other impure acts.

So, why do you do this if you know it is wrong.

The reason for marriage is to multiply and grow (Not through pornography)

You have better stop this sinful action and get to oconfession now while you are still alive and God is full of grACE.

God bless you

We all have problems with sins. I believe Padre Pio said you wrestle all your life. My problems center around the passions. Others perhaps with longsuffering. I do not watch porn films. I haven’t watched a film for years. Clips on the computer but that’s been awhile. I will continue prayer.

 

[NeedImprovement]

When and where did medical science define pornography? Link, please.

Why would it even matter to you ? Didn’t you say there is no authority on pornography?
Seriously ?
How do you suppose medical science could recognize an addiction to something which hasn’t yet been defined ?

This would seem an opportune time to appeal to your um, authority rolleyes

Mine, of course. It is well grounded in the principle of reciprocity, in other words the two variants of the golden rule.
. . .

to emphasize that to date on this thread, you don’t appear to have supplied any links of your own at all so it could be maintained the erratic assertions provided thus far remain unsubstantiated - baseless.

The problem isn’t that no one can define pornography ; the problem is that it has so many different faces , which in turn, makes it complicated/intricate to describe in its entirety .

And you’re totally mistaken in thinking that the appeal it has to different people or to their “tastes” makes it relative and undefineable. The model you present is of inert human beings who are simply subjected to pornography. If that were the case there wouldn’t be much sin involved. It is how a person is going to actively use that porn mentally or physically or both which determines the degree of culpability, which can be mitigated somewhat by addictions ; but hardly ever entirely , since those who are addicted are told there is always a choice

On that last note, the person who is addicted to pornography doesn’t seem to fit into your comfortable little box either. it is no longer a question of taste - it’s beyond their control - hardly something which could be considered morally neutral. And those addicted to pornography are not few in number : According to medical researchers’ clinical data, there are

" millions continue their out-of-control porn use despite consequences of divorce, loss of employment, destroyed reputations, prison time, etc., shouts the obvious: “YES, PORNOGRPAHY IS ADDICTIVE!”

It is how a person is going to actively use that porn mentally or physically or both which determines the degree of culpability, which can be mitigated somewhat by addictions ; but hardly ever entirely , since those who are addicted are told there is always a choice .

I wouldn’t be surprised to discover that I’m not the only one who can’t take your posts on this thread seriously, but just this once, maybe I’ll humour you with a link or two

medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/pornography
pornography
Sexually explicit erotic writings and images. See Child pornography, Erotic, Erotography, Fanny Hill, Obscenity, Potter Stewart standard, Sex work.
McGraw-Hill Concise Dictionary of Modern Medicine. © 2002 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc

medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Pornography+addiction
Porn Addiction
A condition that has been defined as a psychological addiction to, or dependence upon, pornography, characterized by obsessive viewing, reading, and thinking about pornography and sexual themes to the detriment of other areas of the viewer’s life
Segen’s Medical Dictionary. © 2012 Farlex, Inc. All rights reserved

If you want the more in-depth stuff, then please be sure to read the ensuing linked article from the *Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy *all the way through in order to observe the evolution of the author’s three definitions of pornography in an attempt to cover all the different manifestations of pornography.

plato.stanford.edu/entries/pornography-censorship/#1

 

[NeedImprovement]

… not too crazy about flogging a dead horse any longer, so for the rest of us who don’t want to remain in the dark ages and who’d prefer to be on the cutting edge , going back to that quote a post ago:

" millions continue their out-of-control porn use despite consequences of divorce, loss of employment, destroyed reputations, prison time, etc., shouts the obvious: “YES, PORNOGRPAHY IS ADDICTIVE!”

Here’s the link guys.

candeobehaviorchange.com/2009/06/05/is-pornography-a-drug-addiction/

These researchers are saying that pornography addiction is a chemical addiction :

1. When an individual ingests or injects a “drug,” that chemical travels to the receptors in the brain and other parts of the body, seeking to “mimic” the body’s own natural neurotransmitters. In effect, the drug tries to “fake” the body into releasing its own natural or endogenous chemicals. For example, Prozac triggers the body to release its own natural serotonin. Likewise, pornography “mimics” sexual intimacy and “fakes” the body into releasing a tidal wave of endogenous chemicals, which is exactly what pharmaceutical and illicit street drugs do. Can pornography not then be referred to as a “drug”?

1. For those who insist on precision in the use of scientific terms such as “drug,” allow me to put your minds at rest. Can we agree that pornography viewing triggers the release of the body’s own endogenous chemicals, just as sexual intimacy does? And that the porn viewer can become addicted to these internal chemicals just as he would if the release were triggered by a pharmaceutical drug? Is this not chemically-induced addiction?

Just a few links to let us know how extensive the problem is:

winmentalhealth.com/pornography_effects.php

canadadrugrehab.ca/Sex-Addiction-Treatment.html

abcnews.go.com/Health/porn-line-launched-uk-researchers/story?id=14028438

sexualrecovery.com/blog/pornography-addiction-memory-loss.php

sexualrecovery.com/pornography-addiction.php

Check this excerpt out - it’s actually from 2003 :

Research Findings Summaries Compiled by
Mary Anne Layden, Ph D
Director,Sexual Trauma and Psychopathology Program
Center for Cognitive Therapy
University of Pennsylvania

mcap1.com/downloads/Layden_harms.doc
Pornified

“At the 2003 meeting of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers, a gathering of the nation’s divorce lawyers, attendees documented a startling trend. Nearly two-thirds of the attorneys present had witnessed a sudden rise in divorces related to the Internet ; 58% of those were the result of a spouse looking at excessive amounts of pornography online.”

Paul, P. (2005). Pornified. New York: Times Books

All good reminders that we need to be praying about these things too.