Rick Santorum vs. porn industry

[whm]

What about the legality of some health or sex education books?

How graphic do those need to be?

What about the legality of some books for medical criminologists?

Seriously I don’t think that would be a problem.

How about “Where Did I Come From?”

How graphic do those need to be?

The problem is just not that simple and easy.

No the problem is not easy at all. The solution is not to do nothing.

Did you know that in just the last few years researchers did an MRI of a couple having sex because we are still working out exactly what happens and how things work. By your argument above - that would be a criminal act.

Where exactly did my argument say that medical research would be Illegal?

If a husband and wife decided to make their own home movie - that under your definition is a criminal act. Is that so clear?

Were they going to distribute their home movie?

I just think that the problem is more complex than you want to make it.

No the porn out there is much worse and more disturbing than you seem to acknowledge. I am not talking about drawing the line between some photoshop’d playboy centerfold and renaissance art. I’m talking about hardcore pornography. I am talking about filming drug addicted slaves of the sex industry. I’m talking about 12 and 13 year old kids seeing this stuff with little effort nobody doing anything about it.

I don’t mean to be argumentative. I am trying to point out that there are bright lines that can be drawn and have been drawn.

 

[kbachler]

How graphic do those need to be?

That is a matter of opinion, right? Which is why your opinion, or my opinion, doesn’t rule for all.

Some things may arguably need to be very graphic to impact specific information. I might not like that, but I can accept that certain medical texts or criminologist texts, in order to appropriately train people, may need to be graphic.

No the problem is not easy at all. The solution is not to do nothing.

It is if what you want to do doesn’t make it better.

Where exactly did my argument say that medical research would be Illegal?

You said you would ban any image of intercourse. The MRI example is an image of intercourse. Hence, it would be illegal.

Were they going to distribute their home movie?

You said nothing about distribution. You said it was banned, period.

No the porn out there is much worse and more disturbing than you seem to acknowledge. I am not talking about drawing the line between some photoshop’d playboy centerfold and renaissance art. I’m talking about hardcore pornography. I am talking about filming drug addicted slaves of the sex industry. I’m talking about 12 and 13 year old kids seeing this stuff with little effort nobody doing anything about it.

And what I’m saying is that nothing you’ve said up to this point indicated that, nor did it initially address some of the simpler issues I raised.

I understand the concern. I have issues with its complexity and the way you wish to addres it.

 

[whm]

Kbacher, I did not have the time to go into infinite detail to satisfy all possible exceptions. Also noting the audience of this forum I do not want to go into much descriptive detail. However I for one would think it was money well spent, to have some sort of panel approve a a couple dozen sex ed books that are written per year.

The point I have been trying to make is that there is material out there that can be easily categorized. It is already illegal. You can’t sell it on dvd or in a magazine, but it is all over the internet.

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church (bold emphasis is mine):

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. **

 

[kbachler]

Kbacher, I did not have the time to go into infinite detail to satisfy all possible exceptions. Also noting the audience of this forum I do not want to go into much descriptive detail. However I for one would think it was money well spent, to have some sort of panel approve a a couple dozen sex ed books that are written per year.

The point I have been trying to make is that there is material out there that can be easily categorized. It is already illegal. You can’t sell it on dvd or in a magazine, but it is all over the internet.

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church (bold emphasis is mine):

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. **

I’m not arguing my religion. I am arguing foisting it on others as opposed to convincing them.

 

[whm]

I’m not arguing my religion. I am arguing foisting it on others as opposed to convincing them.

It is not a religious issue. It is objectively wrong as is murder, slavery etc.

btw I don’t question your religious or moral convictions. I have a difference of opinion on how to deal with this issue (and I feel very strongly about it).

 

[Nate13]

Porn - images or video created with the purpose of providing content for the sexual enjoyment of men or women.

The use of the naked body for medical purposes would not fit under that definition. This would seem to be a pretty clear thing to distinguish.

 

[kbachler]

It is not a religious issue. It is objectively wrong as is murder, slavery etc.

btw I don’t question your religious or moral convictions. I have a difference of opinion on how to deal with this issue (and I feel very strongly about it).

If you aren’t questioning my convictions, or making it a religous issue, then stop quoting the Catechism as part of your argument.

Sorry, I just don’t see where it is as objectively wrong as depriving someone of their life. It may be wrong, but you’re far from building that argument. Certainly I can envision (and we are aware of ) circumstances which clarify it as wrong. But we can also envision circumstance where there appears to be little (if any) perceived harm.

I will agree that you’re passionate on the issue.

 

[kbachler]

Porn - images or video created with the purpose of providing content for the sexual enjoyment of men or women.

The use of the naked body for medical purposes would not fit under that definition. This would seem to be a pretty clear thing to distinguish.

First, that wasn’t the argument presented earlier. Second, as defined here, how would you make a ban stand up to a Constitutional challenge?

 

[onmyknees]

I applaud Mr Santorum for doing what is right. The decision to do what is right should not be made based on probability of success. It is done because it is the right thing to do.

Right now many people in this country think there is nothing wrong with porn. Voices need to be heard that it is morally wrong and that it does damage people on both sides of the computer screen.

It is not just child porn that is illegal there are obscenity laws on the books now that are not being enforced. There are things shown on the internet that can not be purchased at your local adult store. Many of these people on the internet are being exploited without consent.

I agree with this! Santorum knows now that he might or might not be our next president, yet he wants to do the right thing and get his messages out. Maybe it will make an impression on people. We need to always be planting seeds in everything we do.

Let’s ask Our Lady to pray for all of us!

 

[ahollars]

Caveat: I am in the IT industry.

I know where Rick Santorum is going with his arguments. There has been a bill pending in Congress for many years that has never gotten off the ground. This bill would authorize the FCC to regulate the internet. Among these regulations is the .xxx domain(pronounced “dot triple-X”). It is a sponsored top-level domain (sTLD) intended as a voluntary option for pornographic sites on the Internet. The sponsoring organization is the International Foundation for Online Responsibility (IFFOR). The registry is operated by ICM Registry LLC. The ICANN Board voted to approve the sTLD on 18 March 2011. It went into operation on 15 April 2011.

Right now, there is a movement among social conservatives in Congress to make the use of this domain mandatory. If this were to go into effect, porn blockers would be virtually flawless and completely effective. Website operators would be shutdown, owners would be fined heavily, and violators would be prosecuted under FCC laws.

I support this proposal, and I encourage all Catholics to raise their voices and call for the same from our elected officials and candidates this election year.

 

[whm]

If you aren’t questioning my convictions, or making it a religous issue, then stop quoting the Catechism as part of your argument.

It is not only a religious issue. A purely religious issue would be skipping mass on Sunday. Both are potentially mortal sins.

Sorry, I just don’t see where it is as objectively wrong as depriving someone of their life. It may be wrong, but you’re far from building that argument. Certainly I can envision (and we are aware of ) circumstances which clarify it as wrong.

I never said is was as wrong as any other sin or evil. Rape may not be as wrong as murder either, but its bad enough.

But we can also envision circumstance where there appears to be little (if any) perceived harm.

I can not envision porn being of little harm.

 

[whm]

If you aren’t questioning my convictions, or making it a religous issue, then stop quoting the Catechism as part of your argument.

It is not only a religious issue. I quoted the Catechism because it answers what you previously proposed about laws limiting pornography.

Sorry, I just don’t see where it is as objectively wrong as depriving someone of their life. It may be wrong, but you’re far from building that argument. Certainly I can envision (and we are aware of ) circumstances which clarify it as wrong.

I did not equate pornography as being exactly equal in wrongness to other sins. It is however objectively wrong. Rape for example may not be as wrong as murder, however it is bad enough. Rape and Murder are not religious issues although our religion rightful holds them as being wrong.

But we can also envision circumstance where there appears to be little (if any) perceived harm.

I can not envision circumstances of porn being of little harm. I can envision myself rationalizing it as being of little harm(cause I have in the past), but objectively knowing what it does to men, women, families and people involved in the industry, it is indeed incredibly harmful.

Ahollars, I have heard of the xxx domain. I think that it would be very helpful if this got enacted in the US.

 

[jwashu]

The point is not if porn is morally acceptable or not, I think we all agree it’s probably not. The point and where Santorum is wrong is in trying to legislate morality. Perhaps it’s just “the world” and we should go back to the “old” ways. But lets remember that 100 years ago women couldn’t vote and many children were forced into labor to support their families.

So during that time the rights of the individuals have taken center place. Should the right of the individual be greater than the majorty?

My point of this post isn’t to say what’s happening is wrong or wrong, just that many of the things we take for granted, liberties, and cherish are co-dependent or out growths of each other. It’s not as simple, much like the abortion issue, as just saying “I’m going to stop it bacuse it’s wrong” and actually doing anything about it. People can talk, and some will regretably follow and believe them, all they want but 99.999% of the time they don’t have the time or truly the desire understand the complexity of the issue to actually DO anything about it. Don’t be fooled by someone who shouts about Catholic teachings on sexual matters but ignores the Bishops in the areas that don’t fit in his far right wing political view.

Joe

 

[ahollars]

Don’t be fooled by someone who shouts about Catholic teachings on sexual matters but ignores the Bishops in the areas that don’t fit in his far right wing political view.

What exactly has he ignored?

 

[whm]

My point of this post isn’t to say what’s happening is wrong or wrong, just that many of the things we take for granted, liberties, and cherish are co-dependent or out growths of each other. It’s not as simple, much like the abortion issue, as just saying “I’m going to stop it bacuse it’s wrong” and actually doing anything about it. People can talk, and some will regretably follow and believe them, all they want but 99.999% of the time they don’t have the time or truly the desire understand the complexity of the issue to actually DO anything about it. Don’t be fooled by someone who shouts about Catholic teachings on sexual matters but ignores the Bishops in the areas that don’t fit in his far right wing political view.

What Santorum said is 100% in line with the Catechism paragraph 2354. Are there Bishops who say that paragraph is not correct or that it should not be followed? I don’t quite follow what you are referring to. I don’t see this as a right or left issue, it is a human rights issue.

This is not about restricting liberties. Individual liberties stop when they hurt other people. These “liberties” are already restricted (for hard core porn) in other media forms such a print, dvd, vhs ect.

 

[Nate13]

The point is not if porn is morally acceptable or not, I think we all agree it’s probably not. The point and where Santorum is wrong is in trying to legislate morality. Perhaps it’s just “the world” and we should go back to the “old” ways. But lets remember that 100 years ago women couldn’t vote and many children were forced into labor to support their families.

So during that time the rights of the individuals have taken center place. Should the right of the individual be greater than the majorty?

My point of this post isn’t to say what’s happening is wrong or wrong, just that many of the things we take for granted, liberties, and cherish are co-dependent or out growths of each other. It’s not as simple, much like the abortion issue, as just saying “I’m going to stop it bacuse it’s wrong” and actually doing anything about it. People can talk, and some will regretably follow and believe them, all they want but 99.999% of the time they don’t have the time or truly the desire understand the complexity of the issue to actually DO anything about it. Don’t be fooled by someone who shouts about Catholic teachings on sexual matters but ignores the Bishops in the areas that don’t fit in his far right wing political view.

Joe

Is making prostitution illegal legislating morality as well? When the president says taxes should be raised because its the Christian thing to do is that legislating morality?

 

[yogicat]

No you can’t magically fight it. It is a spiritual fight. I agree if laws were enforced some people would still risk it. But if it is clear that it X is illegal, maybe some people would think twice about viewing it. Maybe some souls would be saved from becoming a slave to sin. Maybe some person won’t get exploited. You just can’t stand by and allow evil to have a field day. We need to be like the good Samaritan and not avoid the person being victimized by robbers.

What kind of punishment would you hand out? Prison? Fines? It seems like this would ultimately be looked at as an attack against the non-religious, and I really really think it destroys Santorums credibility. Maybe fifty years ago this could work, but not today. I know we can’t just let evil have a field day, but there are worse things than porn to fight.

 

[whm]

What kind of punishment would you hand out? Prison? Fines?

There are already punishments for swearing or showing nudity on broadcast TV. Most internet porn would be illegal to sell at an adult dvd store. Such a store would face punishment. The entity providing it on the internet does not.

It seems like this would ultimately be looked at as an attack against the non-religious, and I really really think it destroys Santorums credibility.

I am sure it does hurt his chances with porn users, which may be the majority:shrug:. It gives him credibility to me because he is not saying it to get votes, he is saying it because it he thinks it is right.

Maybe fifty years ago this could work, but not today. I know we can’t just let evil have a field day, but there are worse things than porn to fight.

It doesn’t get to much worse for these women from Russia and eastern Europe that are effectively sex slaves, kept addicted to drugs and basically forced to do porn and prostitution. America is huge marked for this porn.

btw 50 years ago, Humanae Vitae predicted this huge decline in morality as well as the increase in divorce rates.

 

[Allegra]

It seems to me that we are missing the point a little. If porn should be illegal, it isn’t because of the harm it does to the models. It’s because of the harm it does to the people who use it! Porn addictions are a huge problem in our society. Who gives a flip about the models’ self-esteem? Honestly, do you think they had much when they came in the door? What about the young men who get ahold of this stuff at ten years old? (Sometimes with the help and approval of the very people who are supposed to be teaching them to be a man!) What happens by the time they are grown and should be ready to discern marriage? By that point they are addicted, their view of sexual relations is completely corrupt, and they view a woman (or a man, kid, animal, or cartoon character) as nothing more than a means to an orgasm. This is not a recipie for a healthy marriage. So, I’m not at all concerned for the welfare of the prostitutes who create this industry. I’m more concerned for the families that are destroyed by the use of the product.

 

[joclucsylv]

I have been praying that God protect Rick Santorum and help pave his way to the white house.

This country needs to get back on track morally and God will not bless us again as a country until morality returns!!

We will see tonight which way Ilinois voted!! Go Rick!