Student Suspended For Sexual Harrassment - Wearing A Costume To Another School's Prom

[The ClayTaurus]

Whatever you said I said.

Did too.

 

[The ClayTaurus]

Annoying isn't it clay?

mildly humorous, actually.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Did too.

I know you are, but what am i?

 

[The ClayTaurus]

I know you are, but what am i?

I'm rubber, you're glue. (How long until we both get dinged?)

 

[rtwngAvngr]

But seriously folks. I think prostitution should probably be legalized, but publicly shamed, kind of like having b.o.

 

[The ClayTaurus]

But seriously folks. I think prostitution should probably be legalized, but publicly shamed, kind of like having b.o.

Best analogy I've heard in a LONG time.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Not exactly an unbiased source on the subject.



From his site of course so I take the "expert on issues of pornography" as meaning amongst his peers he's an expert. To me his an ex-pastor who was ashamed of his actions. Great for him. He feels bad about it but his hypothesis' do not apply to MOST situations.

With expert analysis like "Porn's outlook is stupid and shallow," I find his opinions alittle biased towards a certain point of view and lacking actual evidence. His over emphasis on women makes me think that he has dealt with these feelings inside of him and feels guilty about it. This is not how most men view women. Porn does not change that either. Porn is simply to entertain. It is not to substitute marriage.

This is not evidence but merely an opinion from someone else who agrees with you.

You really are ignorant, aren't you? Or else you have closed your eyes to what is around you because you don't want to see it in order to carry on with your false beliefs. Or else you have become so jaded already except for the extreme you can't even recognize it when you see it.

Our country and its freedoms have survived for centuries without allowing porn and obscenities. Nobody's freedoms were at risk. And society did not fall apart and rot from within as it is doing so today.

Unless you study history a little bit you won't understand what the porn, sexual, and homosexual "revolution" is all about. You need to understand what the goals of communism are. You must study what the ACLU is doing. You need to understand who the leaders of the "sex revolution" really are - perverts such as Alfred Ginsberg, Hugh Hefner, Larry Flynt. You need to understand how the multi-billion dollar porn business is operating. Are these the people to whom you are hitching your star? Under who's banner you are fighting?

"Pornography was never about sex. It was always about emasculating men and neuro-chemically linking sexual lust with shame, fear, violence and degradation."

From Greatest Generation to Porn Generation
by Judith Reisman
Posted Jun 27, 2005

This is our legacy to our children? A “porn generation”? I was talking with a sweet young 14-year-old girl the other day. She was depressed. “All the boys I’ve been friends with at school, really friends with, they’re now acting so inappropriately.”

No, she wasn’t hurt by anyone. But, she says, “I have to slap them and it’s really upsetting. I know they’re watching pornography,” she adds. “That’s where they get all that stuff from. And it hurts, also because they are ruining their own lives.” She chokes back the tears.

Don’t expect Dr. Phil or any other television maven to reveal pornography for what it is—a major erototoxic virus infecting most exposed. The virus was released into society December 1953 when Hugh Hefner used it to emasculate Joe College. Rendered impotent without fantasy sex, millions of men over time—crossing every political, racial, religious, educational and socioeconomic boundaries—lost the virility and virtue needed to protect their wives and children from the current porn deluge. And when men are emasculated, popping Viagra while lusting after tragic centerfold paper and celluloid and computer dollies, women turn away from home and embrace “work” that may be empty but is reliable.

Benjamin Shapiro, a strapping young 21-year-old author, columnist, survivor of UCLA and current Harvard Law s\School warrior, has written the book for parents and youths—Porn Generation: How Social Liberalism Is Corrupting Our Future (published by Regnery, a Human Events sister company). Shapiro’s Judeo-Christian advocacy is sane, compassionate, documented and easy to take, although he has drawn the wrath of many suffering the pains of amorality.

Shapiro tells “the baby boomers and liberals who make up the current leadership in this country” that they need to take responsibility for “what they’ve done to American society.”

Shapiro observes that if children infected with venereal disease from oral sodomy “at age 12” are not seen as “a broken nation,” we “aren’t looking hard enough.” The baby boomers and “grown-up flower children” became the mass media and education authorities who have corrupted society, writes Shapiro.

Of course, I find this young man especially wise in his awareness of the role of Alfred Kinsey in normalizing the porn generation. Describing Kinsey’s impact he says, “Kinsey claimed that Americans were secret perverts and sex maniacs.” By lying about our parents and grandparents, Kinsey invalidated morality as a “social ideal.” Then, using the old bait and switch trick, says Shapiro, Kinsey pulls out the tattered “hypocrisy” charge.

“The only way to alleviate guilt became abdication of moral sexual standards,” he says. “And when the chief goal is erasing guilt, even for immoral actions, all that remains is narcissism.”

Shapiro argues, with strong support, that discarding traditional morality gave our children over to social liberals, who control our culture through music, film, television and other mass media so that the normal is now considered deviant. He says the effects upon his generation are “disastrous.”

I do not think Shapiro exaggerates. “Like it or not, the porn generation is the future of this country,” says Shapiro. Think of that and consider what decisions will be made by future judges, juries, legislators, prosecutors and Presidents who are pornography addicts.

It is not a good era for parents to rear their young. They try to restrict the erotically laced videos, rap, adverts and Internet porn. Now they are faced with Rainbow Party, a Simon Pulse book (a division of Simon & Schuster) by Paul Ruditis that has little girls pick out different lipstick colors to practice for some boy-girl oral sex orgies. The “me generation” led to “Gen X” that logically has produced the X-Rated Porn Generation.

Shapiro’s writing is crisp and right on target. And take a deep breath folks, because the young man is pointing his finger at most of adult society, for children now are paying with their lives for the adult selfishness and abandonment of strong moral standards.

Most parents are not nearly “in the know” enough about the problems their children face in trying to survive their toxic porn environment. Shapiro’s is a critical wake-up call for parents and it is a book that can give them the knowledge necessary to begin to turn around the amorality that is destroying their children.

“I am a member of a lost generation,” Shapiro writes. “Never in our country’s history has a generation been so empowered, so wealthy, so privileged-and yet so empty.”

Shapiro is a great spokesman for youth and for this nation. Pornography will grow in violence and degradation. Its causal role in child sexual abuse, incest and rape is real and all too well documented. It is increasingly taking the littlest ones, the most innocent. Pornography will not go away unless we treat it like an environmental toxin.

Pornography was never about sex. It was always about emasculating men and neuro-chemically linking sexual lust with shame, fear, violence and degradation.

 

[The ClayTaurus]

You really are ignorant, aren't you? Or else you have closed your eyes to what is around you because you don't want to see it in order to carry on with your false beliefs. Or else you have become so jaded already except for the extreme you can't even recognize it when you see it.

Our country and its freedoms have survived for centuries without allowing porn and obscenities. Nobody's freedoms were at risk. And society did not fall apart and rot from within as it is doing so today.

Unless you study history a little bit you won't understand what the porn, sexual, and homosexual "revolution" is all about. You need to understand what the goals of communism are. You must study what the ACLU is doing. You need to understand who the leaders of the "sex revolution" really are - perverts such as Alfred Ginsberg and Hugh Hefner. You need to understand how the multi-billion dollar porn business is operating. Are these the people to whom you are hitching your star? Under who's banner you are fighting?

"Pornography was never about sex. It was always about emasculating men and neuro-chemically linking sexual lust with shame, fear, violence and degradation."

I knew had power, but damn


Just out of curiousity from an older post, what constitutes a child in the earlier assessment that Playboy has pedophilic tendencies?

 

[ScreamingEagle]

I knew had power, but damn


Just out of curiousity from an older post, what constitutes a child in the earlier assessment that Playboy has pedophilic tendencies?

It is not emasculation by women, bubba.

I'm assuming anyone under the legal age of 18 was considered a child in the study referenced.

 

[insein]

You really are ignorant, aren't you? Or else you have closed your eyes to what is around you because you don't want to see it in order to carry on with your false beliefs. Or else you have become so jaded already except for the extreme you can't even recognize it when you see it.

Our country and its freedoms have survived for centuries without allowing porn and obscenities. Nobody's freedoms were at risk. And society did not fall apart and rot from within as it is doing so today.

Unless you study history a little bit you won't understand what the porn, sexual, and homosexual "revolution" is all about. You need to understand what the goals of communism are. You must study what the ACLU is doing. You need to understand who the leaders of the "sex revolution" really are - perverts such as Alfred Ginsberg, Hugh Hefner, Larry Flynt. You need to understand how the multi-billion dollar porn business is operating. Are these the people to whom you are hitching your star? Under who's banner you are fighting?

"Pornography was never about sex. It was always about emasculating men and neuro-chemically linking sexual lust with shame, fear, violence and degradation."

Seems im not the one with the problem. If you think that pornography began in the 60's then your dead wrong. Pornography began since before Jesus Christ. Specifically in this country pornography has been around since its foundation. You think things are bad now? How about the 1800's when whore houses were on every corner in Big cities, prostitution was the largest profession in the midwest and sex sold to men who were looking to let off some steam after a hard days work. Was communism around then? Was the ACLU around then? No. Pornography is something that is meant to entertain adults. Now you can consider these people scum based on your morality and can have nothing to do with them personally. But to say that they have to live by your morals is UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

What if the majority rule said that we had to live by pagan values and morals? What if we all had to wear severed chicken heads around our necks as a symbol of our morality in society? You see the insanity in your argument? Your basing your RELIGION on the way people should live. I don't know what crazy religion your a part of, but mine doesnt preach that everyone has to live at a higher moral level because it is right and just. In my religion god gave the people FREE WILL to choose between right and wrong. If they choose the righteous path, they were rewarded in heaven. If they chose the wrong path, they were damned to Hell.

So let people make their own fucking decisions. You are NOT God and society has no responsiblity to construct a moral being into people. That is the person's responisibility. IF other people don't wish to deal with that person, then they DON'T HAVE TO.

I often wonder about those that argue the hardest on a position. Your ex-pastor, Gene McConnell somewhat proves my theory. He is a hypocrit. He took an oath to God to be a righteous man and live according to his religions laws. Yet he was "swayed" by the evils of pornography. Its not his fault of course. It was a sex addiction, a disease. Sounds like a liberal point of view to me. Blame on anyone but YOURSELF. Now he takes up the sword against this great evil that most people can handle without losing control of themselves because he feels guilty about his sins. So because of his guilt everyone must suffer as he does. Sounds pretty selfish to me.

I want no part in your world where people have to live according your rules. If you want that type of life, then live it. Don't make other people live the way you do.

 

[insein]

Why should we restrict any behavior that goes on between 2 consenting adults? Can't the rest of society just look the other way while these citizens enjoy their freedom? You need to make you mind up on this one, dude.

Make up my mind on what? You need to be more specific. My reference so far has been to sexual acts. If its not in public, then society isnt looking at them anyway.

You seem to think that making a law against something means that that something will stop being done. Drugs are illegal. People still do drugs. Prostitution is illegal. Women still turn trix. All you do by making something illegal is increase the power of the government and the number of once innocent people into criminals.

 

[The ClayTaurus]

It is not emasculation by women, bubba.

I'm assuming anyone under the legal age of 18 was considered a child in the study referenced.

She appears to be stretching...

...where she says she studied mass media's effects on the minds of children. She emerged from her studies convinced that images of Winnie the Pooh, Mickey Mouse and other cuddly characters that appeared "in Playboy/Penthouse would cause sexual acting out on children."...

...In 1984, Justice Department official Alfred Regnery, now a prominent conservative publisher, granted Reisman $734,371 to analyze the content of Playboy magazines between 1954 and 1984. When she turned in her findings at American University, where she was based, the university refused to publish them. Even Regnery confessed the grant was a mistake. "This is not science, it's vigilantism: paranoid, pseudoscientific hyperbole with a thinly veiled, hidden agenda. This kind of thing doesn't help children at all," Dr. Loretta Haroian, a leading expert on childhood sexuality, said of Reisman's report...

Source.

 

[insein]

She appears to be stretching...

Source.

Last time i checked anyway, children werent buying playboy. I think thats a parents problem if children are looking at their porn stash.

 

[The ClayTaurus]

Last time i checked anyway, children werent buying playboy. I think thats a parents problem if children are looking at their porn stash.

Don't even get me started on her theory of "erototoxins"...

 

[no1tovote4]

Don't even get me started on her theory of "erototoxins"...

Erototoxins? I think I want some of that!

 

[The ClayTaurus]

Erototoxins? I think I want some of that!

No! You don't! You'll get addicted, and then society will collapse.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Seems im not the one with the problem. If you think that pornography began in the 60's then your dead wrong. Pornography began since before Jesus Christ. Specifically in this country pornography has been around since its foundation. You think things are bad now? How about the 1800's when whore houses were on every corner in Big cities, prostitution was the largest profession in the midwest and sex sold to men who were looking to let off some steam after a hard days work. Was communism around then? Was the ACLU around then? No. Pornography is something that is meant to entertain adults. Now you can consider these people scum based on your morality and can have nothing to do with them personally. But to say that they have to live by your morals is UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

What if the majority rule said that we had to live by pagan values and morals? What if we all had to wear severed chicken heads around our necks as a symbol of our morality in society? You see the insanity in your argument? Your basing your RELIGION on the way people should live. I don't know what crazy religion your a part of, but mine doesnt preach that everyone has to live at a higher moral level because it is right and just. In my religion god gave the people FREE WILL to choose between right and wrong. If they choose the righteous path, they were rewarded in heaven. If they chose the wrong path, they were damned to Hell.

So let people make their own fucking decisions. You are NOT God and society has no responsiblity to construct a moral being into people. That is the person's responisibility. IF other people don't wish to deal with that person, then they DON'T HAVE TO.

I often wonder about those that argue the hardest on a position. Your ex-pastor, Gene McConnell somewhat proves my theory. He is a hypocrit. He took an oath to God to be a righteous man and live according to his religions laws. Yet he was "swayed" by the evils of pornography. Its not his fault of course. It was a sex addiction, a disease. Sounds like a liberal point of view to me. Blame on anyone but YOURSELF. Now he takes up the sword against this great evil that most people can handle without losing control of themselves because he feels guilty about his sins. So because of his guilt everyone must suffer as he does. Sounds pretty selfish to me.

I want no part in your world where people have to live according your rules. If you want that type of life, then live it. Don't make other people live the way you do.

ONce again, all you can do is babble "don't tell me what to do" nonsense in reply. Our nation makes laws based upon the votes of the people. If people don't want porn oozing thoughout the public marketplace, they have the right to make laws to prevent that and they have done so. It's called DEMOCRACY. There is no special right to porn anywhere in the Constitution. The problem is that liberal judges, more of whom are becoming porn addicts, are circumventing the people with their judicial activist decisions.

I never said porn "began" in the 60s. This was a period of our history which bamboozled many people into accepting porn as "normal" and a "right"....if it feels good, do it was the motto. It was also a period of time that communist-backed groups had great influence. A goal of communism is to destroy the family. Porn is a great enabler to that end.

As far as McConnell goes, even though he was a pastor, he was human just like anyone else, with all of our human frailities. However, he was man enough to admit his mistakes and then do something about it.

 

[The ClayTaurus]

ONce again, all you can do is babble "don't tell me what to do" nonsense in reply. Our nation makes laws based upon the votes of the people. If people don't want porn oozing thoughout the public marketplace, they have the right to make laws to prevent that and they have done so. It's called DEMOCRACY. There is no special right to porn anywhere in the Constitution. The problem is that liberal judges, more of whom are becoming porn addicts, are circumventing the people with their judicial activist decisions.

I never said porn "began" in the 60s. This was a period of our history which bamboozled many people into accepting porn as "normal" and a "right"....if it feels good, do it was the motto. It was also a period of time that communist-backed groups had great influence. A goal of communism is to destroy the family. Porn is a great enabler to that end.

As far as McConnell goes, even though he was a pastor, he was human just like anyone else, with all of our human frailities. However, he was man enough to admit his mistakes and then do something about it.

Liberal judges are becoming porn addicts? Like who?

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Liberal judges are becoming porn addicts? Like who?

Here's one who likes to masterbate with a sex toy under his robes:

http://abclocal.go.com/wpvi/story?section=bizarre&id=3461941

 

[rtwngAvngr]

ONce again, all you can do is babble "don't tell me what to do" nonsense in reply. Our nation makes laws based upon the votes of the people. If people don't want porn oozing thoughout the public marketplace, they have the right to make laws to prevent that and they have done so. It's called DEMOCRACY. There is no special right to porn anywhere in the Constitution. The problem is that liberal judges, more of whom are becoming porn addicts, are circumventing the people with their judicial activist decisions.

I never said porn "began" in the 60s. This was a period of our history which bamboozled many people into accepting porn as "normal" and a "right"....if it feels good, do it was the motto. It was also a period of time that communist-backed groups had great influence. A goal of communism is to destroy the family. Porn is a great enabler to that end.

As far as McConnell goes, even though he was a pastor, he was human just like anyone else, with all of our human frailities. However, he was man enough to admit his mistakes and then do something about it.

Pure democracy is mob rule. There is no moral compass there either. Acutually we are a constitutional republic with democratically elected legislator and executive. The constitution is there to safeguard against potential excesses of mob rule.