Lily philips and the disgrace of pornography

[Outsider]

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.

[Outsider]

Child porn is illegal because it exploits and harms children. Porn involving adult actors and models is not illegal because of the First Amendment. Which also protects your religious liberties.

Pornography being legal does not protect my religious liberties.

Pornography harms adults, too.

Some religion harms adults too.

If you believe in freedom for some but not all, then you don't really believe in freedom at all, you believe in privilege.

[Outsider]

Some religion harms adults too.

If you believe in freedom for some but not all, then you don't really believe in freedom at all, you believe in privilege.

I find comparing religion to pornography particularly disgusting.

Ken is a liberal. It's part of the ideology.

[Outsider]

Freedom of religion and freedom of speech are right there next to each other in the First Amendment to the Constitution. I didn't put them next to each other. James Madison did.

And it protects religion we like and don't like. As well as speech we like and don't like.

Pornography isn't speech.

The Supreme Court said it is in Miller. V California. And in this country they have the last say, not you.

That doesn't mean you have to agree. And it doesn't mean you don't have the right to agitate for change.

[Outsider]

The primary difference is that you apparently approve of the one, but not the other.

Firearms and cigarettes aren't the same thing at all, and no, I don't approve of people misusing firearms or shooting each other with them.

However, I do think lawful self defense is lawful, regardless of my own personal feelings on the issue. I don't see a problem with people who lawfully bear arms and don't misuse them.

Do you?

I’m not disputing lawful self-defense. I’m pointing out that you allow nuance with firearms — distinguishing between use and misuse — but deny that same nuance with pornography.

That suggests it’s not really about harm, but about what you personally approve of. And personal approval isn’t a stable foundation for law in a free society.

I would dispute that there is really any nuance to be found in pornography. Some is less harmful to the people involved and the general public, but it's still harmful.

It's more akin to the cigarette argument than the gun argument. Any way you use a cigarette is going to harm you. Smoke less, it hurts you less, but it still hurts you.

I've possessed guns from time-to-time since I was 14, and I've yet to shoot anybody's eye out.

[Outsider]

The primary difference is that you apparently approve of the one, but not the other.

Firearms and cigarettes aren't the same thing at all, and no, I don't approve of people misusing firearms or shooting each other with them.

However, I do think lawful self defense is lawful, regardless of my own personal feelings on the issue. I don't see a problem with people who lawfully bear arms and don't misuse them.

Do you?

Producing, selling, and consuming porn is perfectly lawful, more so than killing someone in self defense in fact.

As for killing? Killing is evil. It is right there in the 10 Commandments.

It reads "thou shalt not murder". Murder isn't self-defense. Don't be disingenuous.

And my version of the 10 Commandments has no self defense "loophole". Does yours? I specifically mentioned handguns and assault weapons like the AR-15 which designed for one purpose only. To kill people. One could argue that just like porn, they have no redeeming value. As opposed to shotguns or hunting rifles designed for hunting which one could argue are just "tools" for putting food on the table.

On the other hand, my 10 Commandments makes no mention whatsoever of tobacco or porn. So why the desire to legislate morality when it comes to porn but not guns?

You didn't read the rest of the book, did you?

[Outsider]

I propose a society governed by laws. And despite your assertions to the contrary. Both firearms and porn are lawful in our society. And so I choose to focus my efforts elsewhere.

Which no-one has the right to question or change?

[Outsider]

Unfortunately for your analogy. The right of the government to pass laws to protect the health of the nation is right there in Article 1 of the constitution. The right to spread a deadly disease is not.

OK, so what you're saying is that actually we don't have any freedom of religion at all (the health department can suspend our religious liberties whenever they feel like), yet simultaneously pornography must be allowed because of some notion of "freedom of speech".

No, that's not what I am saying.

And during the entire pandemic, I don't recall a single instance of someone being forcibly vaccinated against their will. The government certainly wasn't snatching people up off the street, tying them down, and vaccinating them against their will. If it is important enough to you not to get vaccinated, then don't get vaccinated. You have that freedom. Just like others have the freedom to choose not to be around you if you aren't going to do your part to help combat a deadly disease.

Oh, really?

https://catholicvote.org/amish-children ... rt-ruling/

"They Forced Us To Get Vaccinated" ⚠ John "Shrek" McPhee

[Outsider]

But the moment we allow one person — or one worldview —to define what is “absolute,” we’re no longer living under shared law. We’re living under imposed belief. That’s not justice. That’s the end of disagreement.

[Outsider]

That’s not what I said. I’ve never advocated exposing children to pornography — only that we don’t criminalize adult behavior based on your personal sense of morality.

How are you going to stop it from reaching children? Especially over the internet?