Ridiculous Seperation Of Church And State

[5stringJeff]

There is a separation of church and state because the Constitution of the United States guarantees freedom of religion. That is why there is no "state" religion.
That is what always confuses me about extreme conservatives. How can they howl about the unjustness of Arabic countries forcing people to be Muslims, when they want to force everyone here to be Christians?

The world is a very diverse place. People worship God in a great variety of ways. Doesn't matter if His name is God, Buddah or Allah. The principles of Hindu, Shinto, Anglican, Morman and various other beliefs are basically the same.
Quit being narrow minded and accept the diversity of all cultures.

I'm going to take you to task on the bolded statements.

First, nobody (except maybe Jerry Falwell) wants to turn America into a Christian theocracy. That has never been anyone's intention. Had it been, it would have happened at the country's founding, when 95-97% of Americans were active churchgoers.

Second, if you really think that Hinduism, Buddhism, Shinto, Christianity, Mormonism, and Islam teach the same thing, you obviously have never studied those religions, or their teaching on the nature of God, the nature and origins of the universe, ethics, etc. And if they were all the same, then how would that be accepting diversity?

 

[MissileMan]

Boy, you bought the Left Wing Lies hook, line and sinker, didn't you? There are no religious conservatives that want to circumvent the law and force you to become a Christian. They do, however, want to clean up society from the mess liberals have made of it.

By making us all live by Christian morals...you can admit it.

You give me too much credit - I never said I was this country's moral compass. However, are you saying that 11 different state referendums against homosexual marriage are a figment of my imagination?

I'm saying that you give too much weight to those narrowly worded referendums. I'll ask you the same question I asked OCA. What percentage support do you think a referendum to make homosexuality a felony would get?

Yes, but how or why do you think laws are made in the first place? Laws are usually based upon beliefs or morals...get it?

Your reading disorder is flaring up again...I said this exact thing. You won't be satisfied until all of your morals are enacted as laws...ain't gonna happen.

Oh, so the "3rd party" (liberal legal term for baby) -you know - the one being killed - isn't to be considered at all?

Intentional obtuseness becomes you...I was obviously talking about the father, which you added to the question to avoid answering it.

Finally broke down I see. Liberals aka fake conservatives can only hold up for so long before they crack and say all that abusive stuff they think will replace the empty void of their logic.

Actually, I was testing your theory that arguments can be won simply by the application of a label...I think you'll agree with me that it doesn't work.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

By making us all live by Christian morals...you can admit it.

Morals are morals. Good is good. Evil is evil. Many different religions are pretty consistent on homosexuality, pornography, and unnecessary abortion. Just because Christianity is the primary religion in America doesn't mean that you will be forced to live by Christian morals. The same good morals can be found in another religion of your choice. However, you won't likely find them in secular communism.

I'm saying that you give too much weight to those narrowly worded referendums. I'll ask you the same question I asked OCA. What percentage support do you think a referendum to make homosexuality a felony would get?

Why shouldn't I give weight to 11 referendums that clearly indicate that the majority of folks are against gay marriage? It's more weight than the opinion of a few liberal judges. Actually I don't think making homosexuality a felony would pass. Most people don't hate the homosexual for just being a homosexual. He's got a personal problem alright, but that's his business. People in general just don't want them to make it everybody else's business too.

Your reading disorder is flaring up again...I said this exact thing. You won't be satisfied until all of your morals are enacted as laws...ain't gonna happen.

You were saying that people can follow their own morals as long as it's within the law. Well, the law can be too lax and the law can change. It's a matter of degree. You're basically accusing Christians of having tougher morals that shouldn't be enforced by the law. Why not? The right wants a saner and more moral society. For instance, porn promotes irresponsible behavior. We conservatives would at least like to keep it out of our public libraries as well as the school libraries. We would like to shut down kiddie porn sites that promote pedophilia. We want to keep porn off TV where children can access it too easily. It's time to shut off the pipeline of filth that continually attempts to enter our homes and schools and public areas.

Intentional obtuseness becomes you...I was obviously talking about the father, which you added to the question to avoid answering it.

Yes I was tired and obtuse last night. I was bringing up the example of the father hitting his pregant wife to make the point that an unborn baby is a baby. If the mother wanted the baby but the father (or any third party) killed it by hitting her, wouldn't that be considered murder? It was in the Lacy Peterson case. He was charged with killing Conner. So why wouldn't any mother killing her unborn baby also be considered a murderer?

Actually, I was testing your theory that arguments can be won simply by the application of a label...I think you'll agree with me that it doesn't work.

If the label fits, wear it.

 

[MissileMan]

Morals are morals. Good is good. Evil is evil. Many different religions are pretty consistent on homosexuality, pornography, and unnecessary abortion. Just because Christianity is the primary religion in America doesn't mean that you will be forced to live by Christian morals. The same good morals can be found in another religion of your choice. However, you won't likely find them in secular communism.

Which many different religions might those be? Specifics please on each issue.

Ahhh, the recurring "you can't have morals unless you are religious" argument...how refreshing!

You were saying that people can follow their own morals as long as it's within the law. Well, the law can be too lax and the law can change. It's a matter of degree. You're basically accusing Christians of having tougher morals that shouldn't be enforced by the law. Why not?

How about because the things you want enforced by the law aren't illegal, for one? And not everyone is a Christian, for two.

The right wants a saner and more moral society. For instance, porn promotes irresponsible behavior. We conservatives would at least like to keep it out of our public libraries as well as the school libraries.

Oooooh, a good, old-fashioned book burning? Do you get to decide which books are obscene? Provide some evidence that actual pornography is available to children in a public or school library and I'll meet you there to pull it off the shelf. Otherwise, this is a baseless accusation to justify injecting your religious beliefs into the public schools.

We would like to shut down kiddie porn sites that promote pedophilia.

We weren't talking about kiddie porn.

We want to keep porn off TV where children can access it too easily. It's time to shut off the pipeline of filth that continually attempts to enter our homes and schools and public areas.

It's called parental controls...use them and quit whining, or even better, don't subscribe to a service that carries channels you find offensive. Leave the rest of us to make the choice for ourselves.

Yes I was tired and obtuse last night. I was bringing up the example of the father hitting his pregant wife to make the point that an unborn baby is a baby. If the mother wanted the baby but the father (or any third party) killed it by hitting her, wouldn't that be considered murder? It was in the Lacy Peterson case. He was charged with killing Conner. So why wouldn't any mother killing her unborn baby also be considered a murderer?

If Lacy had only been 2 months pregnant he wouldn't have been charged with double murder. The state of California believes that a certain amount of development has to take place before a fetus is given equal consideration under the law.

 

[theim]

The entire nation was founded on religious principles. Don't believe it? Read the Declaration of Independence.

I am sick of moral relativists clamoring about how those wacked-out-Christian Religious Right wingnuts want to convert everyone to Christianity everytime a nativity scene is put up on public land and God is mentioned in a public school. School's had mandatory prayer for hundreds of years, yet somehow the republic survived. Curiously, it was shortly after that practice ended that the nation began its descent into severe immorality. And yes, some morals ARE right. A 10 year-old having sex is NOT moral. Cheating on your wife is NOT moral. And I expect to have the right to state these facts in a public setting without people like you accusing people like me of gathering in clandestine meeting halls to plot our Theocratic subversion and overthrow of the US government, and to make the entire book of Leviticus an ammendment to the Constitution (nay, the only ammendment). I don't want to "get inside your bedroom". I honestly cannot bring myself to give a crap what you do with your sex life. I only request that if it is not in line with the common morality of Western Civilization (eg S&M, flamboyently gay parades) that you keep it private and keep it the hell away from my kids.

 

[Bonnie]

Which many different religions might those be? Specifics please on each issue.

Judaism, Budhism, Shinto, Hinduism


Hinduism, the goal is to get as far away from human imperfection as possible and practice yoga as a way to unite themselves with God (same goal as Christian prayer).
Jnana yoga intended to give the practitioner a oneness with God and enlightenment for this is the true path to joy and happiness. To the Hindus the strongest emotion is one of love. Bhakti yoga principals are very tied to Christianity as they say christianity is one great brilliantly lit bhakti highway toward God, and to aodre God with every element of his or her being.
Japam the practice of repeating God's name paralleled in the "way of the Pilgrim in which a peasant prays without ceasing.

I could go on but you get the point

next Buddhism: The four noble truths number 2 right intent being passionate about life and what you hold dear.
Truth 3 includes never to speak badly about somone or say unkind words about another, including false witness, idle chatter, gossip, slander or even subtle belittling. Truth 4 right conduct, do not kill, do not steal, do not lie, do not be unchased, do not drink intoxicants.

Confucisianism practice of Jen silver rule being do not do unto others you would not want others to do to you. Heaven and Earth are considered a continuim. Again meditation or prayer to reach the higher beings.

Judaism found their meaning rooted soley in God, they hold family very high in esteem including fidelity to the marriage, discipline and love towards children, do not steal, do not lie, do not bear false witness, do not kill. Torah their bible is at the very center of their lives, praying and reading it. They follow the Sabbath which is Saturday, Christians is Sunday.

Oooooh, a good, old-fashioned book burning? Do you get to decide which books are obscene? Provide some evidence that actual pornography is available to children in a public or school library and I'll meet you there to pull it off the shelf. Otherwise, this is a baseless accusation to justify injecting your religious beliefs into the public schools

.

Now I didn't read anything in his post about book burning, maybe you see what you want to see to make your point??

Obscene Oxford..offensively indecent, by offending accepted sexual morality, highly offensive

Well why have the word obscene and it's meaning in the English language if we are not even going to attempt to define as a culture what obscene is???

Btw children can access porn on library computers and those that have tried to have safegaps put in place to stop that have failed, so yes it is a problem.

It's called parental controls...use them and quit whining, or even better, don't subscribe to a service that carries channels you find offensive. Leave the rest of us to make the choice for ourselves.

See above

If Lacy had only been 2 months pregnant he wouldn't have been charged with double murder. The state of California believes that a certain amount of development has to take place before a fetus is given equal consideration under the law.

Here you illustrate your capacity for taking a human being and relegating them to the importance of a carrot depending upon the technicality of time spent in the womb, and yes obviously the state of California is doing the same thing with it's law.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

MissleMan, my compatriots here gave you some excellent answers so I won't make any repeat replies.

One point in response however. You said we were were "not talking about kiddie porn". If you meant that we agreed upon not showing children pornography, fine. However, "kiddie porn" is actually adult porn. It is porn about children, made for adults.

Now I realize that you think porn is just fine for adults. So here is a perfect example why porn is NOT good for adults. Kiddie porn excites adults to action who might otherwise not engage in such awful activity. Kiddie porn is very much linked to pedophilia. Kiddie porn must also be produced - this means that pictures or videos must be made with adults having sex with children. So, as you can understand, this form of adult porn can be very destructive.

The ACLU, that beacon of light and freedom of the Left Wing, is out there protecting people who have web sites that promote kiddie porn, all in the name of "free speech". This is a form of adult porn that the left is supporting.

Do you think this is moral? Do you support it?

If you don't, then you are obviously making a "moral judgement" upon society. (Oh, the horrors! )

If you are against kiddie porn, can you explain why we cannot or should not be against other forms of destructive porn as well? What's the difference between the two moral judgements? Age only? Many think that age is relative and we should lower or do away with age restrictions. In fact, the Left is all for "children's rights".

Obviously the ACLU is effectively making its moral judgements upon society. And it's not even in the name of religion.

 

[MissileMan]

Judaism, Budhism, Shinto, Hinduism


Hinduism, the goal is to get as far away from human imperfection as possible and practice yoga as a way to unite themselves with God (same goal as Christian prayer).
Jnana yoga intended to give the practitioner a oneness with God and enlightenment for this is the true path to joy and happiness. To the Hindus the strongest emotion is one of love. Bhakti yoga principals are very tied to Christianity as they say christianity is one great brilliantly lit bhakti highway toward God, and to aodre God with every element of his or her being.
Japam the practice of repeating God's name paralleled in the "way of the Pilgrim in which a peasant prays without ceasing.

I could go on but you get the point

next Buddhism: The four noble truths number 2 right intent being passionate about life and what you hold dear.
Truth 3 includes never to speak badly about somone or say unkind words about another, including false witness, idle chatter, gossip, slander or even subtle belittling. Truth 4 right conduct, do not kill, do not steal, do not lie, do not be unchased, do not drink intoxicants.

Confucisianism practice of Jen silver rule being do not do unto others you would not want others to do to you. Heaven and Earth are considered a continuim. Again meditation or prayer to reach the higher beings.

Judaism found their meaning rooted soley in God, they hold family very high in esteem including fidelity to the marriage, discipline and love towards children, do not steal, do not lie, do not bear false witness, do not kill. Torah their bible is at the very center of their lives, praying and reading it. They follow the Sabbath which is Saturday, Christians is Sunday.

You misunderstood my question: I was asking for all of these alleged many religions that share Christian morals when it comes to issues like abortion, homosexuality, and pornography with specific quotes from other religion's texts that espouse said morals.

.

Now I didn't read anything in his post about book burning, maybe you see what you want to see to make your point??

As I am certain that you cannot find issues of Hustler on the shelves of school libraries, and as ScreamingEagle was claiming a need to clean up the libraries, I made the tiny leap to the conclusion that there are books on the shelves he would find offensive to the point of having them removed. Based on everything he has written in this thread, it was an even smaller leap to the conclusion that he would burn them if opportunity arose.

Obscene Oxford..offensively indecent, by offending accepted sexual morality, highly offensive

Well why have the word obscene and it's meaning in the English language if we are not even going to attempt to define as a culture what obscene is???

There are laws in place already that cover obscenity.

Btw children can access porn on library computers and those that have tried to have safegaps put in place to stop that have failed, so yes it is a problem.

This is really a no-brainer. Require adult supervision of internet access for children.

Here you illustrate your capacity for taking a human being and relegating them to the importance of a carrot depending upon the technicality of time spent in the womb, and yes obviously the state of California is doing the same thing with it's law.

You and I are never going to agree on this subject.

 

[MissileMan]

MissleMan, my compatriots here gave you some excellent answers so I won't make any repeat replies.

One point in response however. You said we were were "not talking about kiddie porn". If you meant that we agreed upon not showing children pornography, fine. However, "kiddie porn" is actually adult porn. It is porn about children, made for adults.

Now I realize that you think porn is just fine for adults. So here is a perfect example why porn is NOT good for adults. Kiddie porn excites adults to action who might otherwise not engage in such awful activity. Kiddie porn is very much linked to pedophilia. Kiddie porn must also be produced - this means that pictures or videos must be made with adults having sex with children. So, as you can understand, this form of adult porn can be very destructive.

The ACLU, that beacon of light and freedom of the Left Wing, is out there protecting people who have web sites that promote kiddie porn, all in the name of "free speech". This is a form of adult porn that the left is supporting.

Do you think this is moral? Do you support it?

If you don't, then you are obviously making a "moral judgement" upon society. (Oh, the horrors! )

If you are against kiddie porn, can you explain why we cannot or should not be against other forms of destructive porn as well? What's the difference between the two moral judgements? Age only? Many think that age is relative and we should lower or do away with age restrictions. In fact, the Left is all for "children's rights".

Obviously the ACLU is effectively making its moral judgements upon society. And it's not even in the name of religion.

In typical fashion, you change the subject to avoid answering a difficult question. To make this clear enough for even you to understand, I don't think kids should be watching pornography. I also don't think that it's acceptable to make child-on-child, adult-on-child, or child-on-adult porn.

You have yet to explain how a husband and wife watching a porno movie together in the privacy of their own home is destructive. Enlighten us!

 

[Bonnie]

MissileMan]

You misunderstood my question: I was asking for all of these alleged many religions that share Christian morals when it comes to issues like abortion, homosexuality, and pornography with specific quotes from other religion's texts that espouse said morals.

On matters such as birth control, sterilization, masturbation, homosexuality, bisexuality, petting and polygamy, Hindu scripture is tolerantly silent, neither calling them sins nor encouraging their practice, neither condemning nor condoning.
The two important exceptions to this understanding view of sexual experience are adultery and abortion, both of which are considered to carry heavy karmic implications for this and future births.
http://www.experiencefestival.com/sexuality


One principle would be the First Precept. The First Precept is a moral principle that Buddhists should try to keep as far as they are able. It is "I will not harm any living creature." Note that this does not just apply to humans, so the question as to whether a foetus is fully human does not arise here - if it is accepted that the foetus is alive, it should not be harmed.
Note however that this applies to all creatures, so really it is wrong to harm a chicken or a bug. However you might argue that it may be regrettable but necessary to kill some creatures at times, and whilst wrong, no Buddhist maintains that someone who eats chicken or swats insects will go to hell! Is a foetus different to a lamb? Views differ, but we need to examine some other principles here.
The general Buddhist belief about rebirth is that at conception three things come together - the sperm, the egg, and the karmic force that is the effect of a previous life. Without getting technical about how rebirth works, basically this means that a human life begins at the moment of conception.
If a human foetus is terminated or otherwise dies, this might mean in Buddhist terms that bad karma carried over from the previous life has been 'paid', and so the next life will be more fortunate. However at the same time the people concerned with causing the abortion (say the woman, doctors etc.) will be generating bad karma themselves for this act of violence.
In Buddhist terms whether an action is good or bad largely depends on one's intention. If a woman was to reflect deeply on her proposed act and felt that in her heart a decision to have an abortion is not based on selfishness then maybe the act would not generate bad karma.
The whole Buddhist approach to ethics can be summed up in one word - compassion. This is more important than any rules or doctrines. Compassion for the unborn foetus is necessary, but other conditions need to be considered, and compassion for the pregnant woman is vital too. At the very least I would say that if a Buddhist felt that a woman had made a wrong decision in having an abortion they should certainly extend compassion to her and not be judgmental.
http://re-xs.ucsm.ac.uk/cupboard/filing/essays/essay3.htm


Homosexuality in Buddhism is a very complex issue, even more so than in other major religions. While it would be wrong to say that Buddhism is opposed to homosexuality, it would also be misleading to say that Buddhism is openly welcoming of homosexuality. Since there are many schools of Buddhism, there are also different views of homosexuality in Buddhism.
A Buddhist does not discuss issues of right and wrong and it would be very unusual for a Buddhist to tell others how to behave. Instead, Buddha encouraged people to introspect and find truth for themselves (even if it meant disregarding his teaching) and to put it into practice for themselves:
"Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumoured by many. Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it."
Buddha placed a great emphasis on demonstrating compassion for all life and all people. It doesn’t matter who it is, or what has been done. No action is ever called "right" or "wrong", but rather intention and outcome is considered in the context of a whole. For example, in Zen, there are even stories of teachers behaving suddenly and violently in unexpected ways in order to impart enlightenment on their students.
However, there are Buddhist laws with regard to sexual conduct which are enforced in most monasteries. Sexual desire, regardless of which sex it is for, is still a desire, and according to Buddhism desire leads to suffering and so it is to be avoided. Therefore, in order to keep the body and mind pure, monks do not engage in sexual acts of desire. The principle of right mind and right conduct applies to laypeople as well, but obviously this does not necessarily translate into abstinence.
There is no answer, then, to the question, "Is homosexuality outlawed in Buddhism?" Still, it would not be surprising to see homosexuals expelled from Buddhist clergy or frowned upon, though this should not be construed as a condemnation of homosexuality.

http://fixedreference.org/en/20040424/wikipedia/Buddhist_views_of_homosexuality


Judaism
The Torah states that: "[A man] shall not lie with another man as [one would] with a woman, it is a to-eva" (Leviticus 18:22). The term to'eva, is usually translated as "abomination". The Talmud says that this term can be understood as a contraction of the words toeh hu va meaning he is wandering (from the path of righteousness) by doing this act. In any case the Torah considers anal sex a capital crime if done intentionally in the presence of witnesses. However, in Jewish law it would be extremely difficult to get a conviction on a capital crime, and in any case capital crimes have not been prosecuted since before the destruction of the second temple.
Other acts of homosexuality would be forbidden by the Torah prohibition, Lo sikrevu legalos ervah meaning You shall not come close to another person for the purpose of committing a sexual crime. Homosexual acts between women, have been forbidden by the Rabbis on the basis of "do not act like in The Land of Egypt, where you have stayed, and do act as like in the land of Canaan where I will bring you, and do not follow in their laws" (Leviticus 18:3). The oral law (Sifra 8:8 on the place) mentions that one of the "laws", i.e. ingrained characteristics, was the marriage of women to each other, as well as a man to a woman and her daughter. The Talmud follows this view, forbidding lesbianism.
Those who are inclined towards homosexuality have not committed an offence thereby, but are required to contain their urges (see frottage). As is the case with other sins for which one has a natural inclination, one is expected to fight it as best as he can and to do teshuvah, repentance, if he has given in to temptation. Orthodox Judaism treats those who have difficulty with keeping the laws of the Torah with understanding, but would never condone the breaking of those laws.

Conservative Judaism (also known as Masorti Judaism)
In the Conservative Jewish community, the scholars on the Committee on Jewish Law and Standards (CJLS) makes decisions on Jewish law. In 1992 the CJLS accepted four teshuvot (responsa) on homosexuality; these were used as backing sources for a unified consensus position. The consensus position is that given the current scientific, psychological and biological information on the origin and nature of homosexuality, homosexual relationships can not be judged to be in accord with Halakha (Jewish law). Some of the responsa note that future information on this subject may be sufficient to utilize leniencies and potential legal novellae; therefore the law committee holds the right to re-evaluate this area at a future date. The "CJLS Consensus Statement of Policy Regarding Homosexual Jews in the Conservative Movement" approved March 25, 1992, reads as follows:
(A) We will not perform commitment ceremonies for gays and lesbians.
(B) We will not knowingly admit avowed homosexuals to our rabbinical and cantorial schools, or the Rabbinical Assembly or Cantors' Assembly. At the same time, we will not instigate witch hunts against those who are already members or students.
(C) Whether homosexuals may function as teachers or youth leaders in our congregations and schools will be left to

http://fixedreference.org/en/20040424/wikipedia/Jewish_views_of_homosexuality

Terminology in Chinese
Nowadays, tongzhi (同&#24535 is used as slang in Mandarin Chinese referring to homosexuals, while in Cantonese gei1(&#22522, adopted from English Quick Facts about: gay
Someone who practices homosexuality; having a sexual attraction to persons of the same sexgay, is used. This is sometimes considered to be offensive when used by heterosexuals or even by homosexuals in certain situation. Tongzhi literally means "Quick Facts about: comrade
A fellow member of the Communist Partycomrade", but is simply a head-rhyme with tongxinglian (同性&#25088, a formal word for "homosexuality/homosexual(s)" (literally same-sex relations/love). Another slang term is boli (玻璃, Quick Facts about: pinyin
Quick Summary not found for this subjectpinyin: bōlí, crystal or glass) which is not so commonly used.

Traditional views towards homosexuality in China's society
All major religions in ancient China do have some sort of codex which have traditionally been interpreted as being against homosexuality. For example the Quick Facts about: Confucians
A believer in the teachings of ConfuciusConfucians has the codex that a man should behave according to somewhat traditional male gender roles and a woman likewise. So, for example, Quick Facts about: transvestism
The practice of adopting the clothes or the manner or the sexual role of the opposite sextransvestism is a deed that is against the Confucian natural law.

http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/encyclopedia/H/Ho/Homosexuality_in_China.htm

Im sure you will read into this what you want, and that's okay by me. I will add that I see consistency here that these other faiths all see something wrong with abortion and homosexuality to the point that it comes naturally or perhaps an inate belief that both these practices are abhorant. Personally I don't care what other faiths believe or don't, all that matters to me is my faith and beliefs, however ScreamingEagle did pose the question.
.

There are laws in place already that cover obscenity.

So let's actually use them. The ACLU has this nasty
habit of representing NAMBLA, and if they can do that legally then there are some obsenity laws that are not being followed or enforced

This is really a no-brainer. Require adult supervision of internet access for children.

As most parents do, however it wasn't long ago that parents didn't have to worry if their kids went to the local or school library unattended and would have access to pornography there. Since most adults have home computers and they really NEED porn in their lives I would think homes and adult oriented coffee houses should suffice and allow schools and librarys to place kid safety features on those computers.........And again the courts struck that down courtesy of the ACLU.

You and I are never going to agree on this subject.

Yes that's a given.......thank heaven!!

 

[ScreamingEagle]

In typical fashion, you change the subject to avoid answering a difficult question. To make this clear enough for even you to understand, I don't think kids should be watching pornography. I also don't think that it's acceptable to make child-on-child, adult-on-child, or child-on-adult porn.

You have yet to explain how a husband and wife watching a porno movie together in the privacy of their own home is destructive. Enlighten us!

Easy. How about a porno video that shows a threesome? This is destructive to the marriage unit because it promotes sex with people from outside the marriage. That is not good for a stable marriage.

How about porno that depicts S&M? This type of sexual deviation engages in the degredation of people with their sadistic or machochistic behaviors. Not exactly something that promotes a healthy marriage.

I'm glad that you don't think kiddie porn should be allowed. You have just engaged in a "moral judgement" for whatever reason. The ACLU would hate it. Good for you. You have separated yourself from the lefties. Now the rest is just a matter of degree.

 

[Annie]

Easy. How about a porno video that shows a threesome? This is destructive to the marriage unit because it promotes sex with people from outside the marriage. That is not good for a stable marriage.

How about porno that depicts S&M? This type of sexual deviation engages in the degredation of people with their sadistic or machochistic behaviors. Not exactly something that promotes a healthy marriage.

I'm glad that you don't think kiddie porn should be allowed. You have just engaged in a "moral judgement" for whatever reason. The ACLU would hate it. Good for you. You have separated yourself from the lefties. Now the rest is just a matter of degree.

Screaming, you and I and all whole lot of others probably agree on what is 'right and wrong.' Yet I am not willing to say adults cannot have access to what they will, regardless of the outcome for their immortal souls. It's the price to be paid by going down that road, in a free country. I like the choices I have, such as under the 2nd amendment.

We have to honor the rights and responsibilities. Those that wish to go to hell in a handbasket, more power to them. I don't, doubt you do either.

Kids, are the parents responsibility. I monitored mine when I needed to-from about 7-18 on internet. Pulled history daily. Read their 'online journals' and would use what I gained to begin discussions with them, though I never admitted to such.

 

[Bonnie]

Screaming, you and I and all whole lot of others probably agree on what is 'right and wrong.' Yet I am not willing to say adults cannot have access to what they will, regardless of the outcome for their immortal souls. It's the price to be paid by going down that road, in a free country. I like the choices I have, such as under the 2nd amendment.

We have to honor the rights and responsibilities. Those that wish to go to hell in a handbasket, more power to them. I don't, doubt you do either.

Kids, are the parents responsibility. I monitored mine when I needed to-from about 7-18 on internet. Pulled history daily. Read their 'online journals' and would use what I gained to begin discussions with them, though I never admitted to such.

Hey lady I am in full agreement with you that adults should be able to decide what is right for them or is not. I would like to say there is another angle to this discussion and it has much less to do with worrying about souls going to hell and much more practical reasons to do with the damage/ divorce pornography can do to a marriage if both partners are not equal willing participants in having it enter the marriage. There have been many studies done on this of which Im sure you are aware so I won't bore you with the details. And this can impact society with broken marriages etc. Im not suggesting that adults don't have access to this information and it is indeed an obligation to know this if it becomes an issue in marriage or one which puts young women in danger of assaults at the hands of young men, who, are technically adults, but lack the maturity to handle that kind of material and can start an unhealthy objectification of women. So in a way it's not exactly something that happens in a vacuum... sadly.

 

[Annie]

Hey lady I am in full agreement with you that adults should be able to decide what is right for them or is not. I would like to say there is another angle to this discussion and it has much less to do with worrying about souls going to hell and much more practical reasons to do with the damage/ divorce pornography can do to a marriage if both partners are not equal willing participants in having it enter the marriage. There have been many studies done on this of which Im sure you are aware so I won't bore you with the details. And this can impact society with broken marriages etc. Im not suggesting that adults don't have access to this information and it is indeed an obligation to know this if it becomes an issue in marriage or one which puts young women in danger of assaults at the hands of young men, who, are technically adults, but lack the maturity to handle that kind of material and can start an unhealthy objectification of women. So in a way it's not exactly something that happens in a vacuum... sadly.

Bonnie, I hear you. It's just not something that can be regulated. Truth is, scum will seek its level, whether male or female. The injured party will pay the price, often with children involved. I know.

 

[NoLabel]

Bonnie, I hear you. It's just not something that can be regulated. Truth is, scum will seek its level, whether male or female. The injured party will pay the price, often with children involved. I know.

The government is not our moral judge, that judge lives in a place much higher, and more just. However, if a person makes a moral judgement, then breaks a law, then the government can, and should step in.

If all the moralists in here want to tackle a real problem, work to overturn Roe vs Wade, not what books I read, movies I watch, or who I have in my bed. Get your priorities right. I firmly believe that abortion is killing, and should not be legal for ANY reason. Incest, what did the unborn do wrong. Rape, ditto. A fetus is an undeveloped human being, created by god (or the supreme being you believe in), and only god has the right to terminate it. There are over 2500 abortions EVERY DAY in this country, that isn't women's rights, that is killing at the genecide level.

 

[Annie]

Bonnie, I hear you. It's just not something that can be regulated. Truth is, scum will seek its level, whether male or female. The injured party will pay the price, often with children involved. I know.

The government is not our moral judge, that judge lives in a place much higher, and more just. However, if a person makes a moral judgement, then breaks a law, then the government can, and should step in.

If all the moralists in here want to tackle a real problem, work to overturn Roe vs Wade, not what books I read, movies I watch, or who I have in my bed. Get your priorities right. I firmly believe that abortion is killing, and should not be legal for ANY reason. Incest, what did the unborn do wrong. Rape, ditto. A fetus is an undeveloped human being, created by god (or the supreme being you believe in), and only god has the right to terminate it. There are over 2500 abortions EVERY DAY in this country, that isn't women's rights, that is killing at the genecide level.

well hello, it is customary to put quotes in quote marks.

 

[NoLabel]

well hello, it is customary to put quotes in quote marks.

Sorry forgot to use the "Quote" button.

 

[Bonnie]

Bonnie, I hear you. It's just not something that can be regulated. Truth is, scum will seek its level, whether male or female. The injured party will pay the price, often with children involved. I know.

The government is not our moral judge, that judge lives in a place much higher, and more just. However, if a person makes a moral judgement, then breaks a law, then the government can, and should step in.

If all the moralists in here want to tackle a real problem, work to overturn Roe vs Wade, not what books I read, movies I watch, or who I have in my bed. Get your priorities right. I firmly believe that abortion is killing, and should not be legal for ANY reason. Incest, what did the unborn do wrong. Rape, ditto. A fetus is an undeveloped human being, created by god (or the supreme being you believe in), and only god has the right to terminate it. There are over 2500 abortions EVERY DAY in this country, that isn't women's rights, that is killing at the genecide level.

Well Nolabel you essentially stepped into the tailend of a conversation and you missed the jist. Im was never suggesting that Governement should regulate morality in the area of pornography but rather stating something that came up in previous postings which was whether the government regulates something or not is not even relevant to the fact that it still has consequences on society as do many things. And yes people are free to determine for themselves what is moral and what is not to the extent that what they do doesn't harm others. Obviously I believe abortion does in fact hurt not only the baby and the mother/family of the baby but also society because it makes us numb to the value of human life. I have in fact donated my time to pro-life groups in different capacities as many other "moralists" have. I have also counseled women who have lost their marriages to pronography so I see the damage it does, so although not in the same league as abortion it rings true that almost everything we do in life has consequences.

 

[acludem]

I will explain once more what the ACLU's involvement in the NAMBLA case was: The ACLU was brought in by NAMBLA's web provider. The ACLU never officially represented NAMBLA but did provide some legal advice and assistance in their case, insofar as it related to NAMBLA's webpage and it's relationship to its web provider. The ACLU disagrees with NAMBLA's stated agenda which is to eliminate age of consent laws. The ACLU also opposes those who promote child molestation or child pornography, NAMBLA has denied doing either of these and denied doing so on their website which was the subject of the lawsuit. ACLU's involvement in the case was about whether or not web providers can be help liable for misconduct by their users, not whether or not NAMBLA was promoting child molestation. There were two separate lawsuits, one against NAMBLA itself, the other against the web provider. Those are the facts. Stop bringing this case up as a red herring when you have no better argument.

acludem

 

[Bullypulpit]

Kids, are the parents responsibility. I monitored mine when I needed to-from about 7-18 on internet. Pulled history daily. Read their 'online journals' and would use what I gained to begin discussions with them, though I never admitted to such.

You go girl! It's truly pathetic that so few parents give their responsibilities to their children so little attention. Ya done good!