Lily philips and the disgrace of pornography

[Outsider]

One could also make a case that the legal situation in our country that allows for divorce and remarriage for any or no reason is also a very bad status quo, that it wasn't always this way, and that it is deeply harming our nation's children.

"No fault" divorce shouldn't be a thing, either. If it weren't, maybe people wouldn't marry so lightly, and there wouldn't be as many divorces.

And a LOT more pron than people who support it are wiling to admit is non-consensual, or is depicting minors.

[Outsider]

Nevertheless, the idea of marrying someone else while your first wife is still living is reprehensible to many Christians. This is not confined to 'some plain Anabaptists.' I work with and am acquainted with Christians who are not and have never been Anabaptists (and who are not likely to have been led to their view by Anabaptist influence) who have the same view - Wesleyan Holiness and conservative evangelicals.

But the point here is that there are many other things besides pornography that are repugnant to Christians and are legal in this country.

Outside of some plain Anabaptist groups and a very small number of other groups like the ACF (a Pentecostal denomination), Christians do not find it reprehensible to marry another woman after your first wife divorces you and marries someone else.

I didn't know that some groups refused divorce for adultery. Is that true?

Personally, I wish plain Anabaptists were as repulsed by husbands who are very cruel to their wives as they are by the idea of some seeker who has a divorce in their past joining their circles, which is one of the reasons I stopped fellowshipping with such plain Anabaptists. I got tired of the smug self righteousness of taking a bold stance against seekers with a divorce in their past, yet not being equally as harsh with:

- Husbands who chronically consume pornography and refuse to quit. (Bonus points when said pornography is, well, illegal, and the church still tried to cover it up and/or blame the wife.)
- Husbands who kept trying to talk to other women online in an obscene or flirtatious way, despite these other women complaining about it and informing the wife.
- Husband grooms / sexual assaults multiple women including girls his daughter’s age (right down to confessing this to the police).
- Husbands who would try to meet up with prostitutes - sometimes getting caught by the cops. Church then tried to cover it up and complained about anyone “gossiping” about it, despite it being in a public court case with a conviction.
- Husbands who would sexually harass, grope, etc. their female employees - all the way to losing a court case over this and having to pay damages to one of their former female employees.

Stopping divorces is good. Stopping the above things is even more important. It is frankly quite cruel and unbiblical to teach someone to stay with a husband or wife who repeatedly commits adultery, sexually assaults others, or repeatedly brings pornography into the home. At the very least, the church could excommunicate them, instead of blaming the wife for not being more “submissive”.

My knowledge of most of the above is due to public records, and before anyone asks, yes, it’s multiple people.

Stopping all of that is important.

[Outsider]

It's possible to believe these two things at the same time --

Yes, porn is immoral. No, I don't think the government should criminalize it.

It's possible to believe that:

• Porn is spiritually harmful.
• Damages families and individuals
• Has no place in a healthy life

And still believe that criminalizing it does more harm than good, especially when it comes to cvil liberties and legal overreach.

Can you guarantee that all of the pron on the internet is consensual? That none of it is a Traci Lords situation? (Which reportedly from those formerly involved in the "industry" is more common than has been acknowledged in this thread.)

[Outsider]

Yes, and the tobacco industry argued for a long time that people had an “individual right” to choose to smoke (and become addicted to cigarettes).

But it isn't a Constitutionally protected right. Any more than there is a Constitutionally protected right to sell raw unpasteurized milk or build an apartment building on a lot zoned for single family homes.

States can and do regulate all manner of commerce and activity for all manner of reasons subject to the limits of the Constitution. But unless you want to repeal the First Amendment, the production and distribution of ordinary sexually explicit material to adults is going to remain legal and common. And that is actually how the American public wants it.

https://ktla.com/news/local-news/porn-s ... as-office/

[Outsider]

The legal reason that child porn is illegal, is not because "children have less freedom of speech than adults". It is deemed illegal because it's creation involves child abuse. And yet a different measure is used for adult porn - "freedom of speech".

Tell me about Roth vs United States and Miller v. California, and mesh that together with New York v Ferber and Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition. I mean if you want to argue the brilliant logic and consistency of the matter in order to defend pornography, have at it I guess.

My problem with it is 1.)Much of it is non-consensual:

https://fightthenewdrug.org/pornhub-rep ... al-videos/

https://www.cosmopolitan.com/uk/reports ... s-removed/

Girls misled into believing that they can remain anonymous while putting themselves all over the internet with a fake name and/or tattoos, and a little makeup to cover identifying marks (which is usually inconsistent). They start them off just doing nudies, then gradually ease them into doing things they wouldn't do if they knew they would be eventually found out (which they always are, usually when it's too late for them to feel like there's any hope for them to do anything else).

I've known a lot of porn girls personally since the 1990's. None of them were very happy people.

[Thomas_muntzer]

I recall the quote from Alvin Goldstein, a publisher who fought for the legalization and dissemination of pornography in the last century:

“The only reason we're into pornography is because we think Christ is garbage. Christianity is garbage. Pornography thus becomes a way of desecrating Christian culture, and as it penetrates the very heart of the American mainstream, its subversive nature becomes more intense.”

This girl is a product of that subversion of Christian culture through pornography

I saw an interview where she reported she had been viewing porn since she was 11 years old. I never saw the kind of stuff they watch as kids (one porn girl interviewed reported she had been watching hardcore porn since she was 7 years old!!!) until I was nearly 30 years old when I walked into a friend's house while he and his wife were watching it on their TV.

I had seen Playboy and such, though. And for most of my life I thought it was harmless (nudies). But since that time, I've discovered that the Playmate's life wasn't as clean and consensual as I had believed.

Yes the link to the interview was deleted to not promote her name but it's insane kids at that age watching hard porn