posted
Shmuel, as Lyrhawn recognized, I wasn't arguing relative values of Christmas and porn - just using both as examples of things that some people want to be shielded from and that some people want to have accessible. So Lyrhawn was quite correct in not having that argument with me.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: If there are not any such people, you really ought not to object to them.
Ought I not to? Christians who demand a holiday be exclusively Christmasy commit the same mistake I think secularists do, they want everyone to conform to their point of view.
I just do not understand why an emphasis on inclusion is worse then an emphasis on total exclusion. Only atheists are really happy with that arrangement because it just happens to look like what they believe.
The only equivalent I can draw is a school where instead of saying, "Christians only please." they say, "No Buddhists, No Muslims, No Hindus, etc" Until they quite literally make a list long enough to encompass every religion and just happen to forget Christianity.
In such a school Christianity could be expressed and even applauded and if you complained they would point to how its perfectly fair as they so broadly reject all religions. Christianity is just how it is, they can't help it if you disagree with their version of science.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
BB: If you're trying to objectively consider the possibility, come up with some evidence for it instead of noting for every persuasive argument supporting some other cause that porn could be part of the problem, too.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by 777: Also, what was it about my wording in that fragment that didn't make sense?
You're implying that you're asexual.
I guess I need to clarify. When I say I don't understand erotic stimulation, I mean that I don't get why people feel that they need artificial, cheap sexual stimulation by porn and sexually-stimulating material.
I hold to pretty strict LDS standards. I don't want sexual stimulation outside of sex itself, and I don't want sex outside of marriage. Period. This doesn't mean I don't want sex at all; it just means that I believe that there's an appropriate time for it in my life. It's a nuisance to me at any other time.
For instance: I hate masturbation. It's unnecessary to me (I'm only 18) and downright embarrassing when it goes off at random. Things that influence me to masturbate (or worse, trigger it) are on my list of definitely bad things. This includes stuff such as immodest dress, pornographic material, pornographic subject matter, and other things besides.
If you want to masturbate over cheap porn, go right ahead. (This isn't directed to you in particular, Gecko.) But I want no part of that in my life, and I don't appreciate it when society's apparent lack of sexual morality screams at me whenever I go out the door.
Posts: 292 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think it was last Christmas that the mayor of Sydney decided not to put Christmas decorations on Town Hall, as per usual; citing sensitivity towards Muslims. What a joke. The vast majority of Muslims in Australia don't have a problem with Christmas, and they themselves seemed to think the gesture was unnecessary. Funny, that.
I don't think it's the responsibility of the state to decorate the nation during holidays, but the rationale given is ridiculous in my opinion.
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade:
Once a year we had international day, and since my school had students from MANY MANY countries and every continent, parents would setup booths around the school and religious displays relative to that country were encouraged. Classes were canceled and we spent the day visiting booths. We got cool passports and we got them stamped at every booth. I looked forward to international day the entire year as it meant I would come home having eaten delicious food from more places then I could count, and anything from having Australia's flag painted on my face, to getting small kit of Legos from the Denmark booth.
I used to go to an International school and we had Carnivals like this annually. Those were the days. My brother helped run the Australian booth, where they sold steak sandwiches and whatnot, but I have to admit: I defected and went for the New Zealand booth's lamb chops
The Scandinavian booths were also good fun, if you were over 20. What with the beer and the Viking helmets.
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade:
edit: Incidentally does anybody know what a certain game from The Netherlands is called. Its a long wooden table with 3 openings. You slide these coined shaped pieces of wood about the size of a can of tuna and you are supposed to slide them through the openings.
Despite having lived there for a year, I have never played this game. We were probably too busy playing marbles!
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots:
For me (I am a church musician) praying and singing prayers are very much the same. I don't think I could, in good conscience, sing a hymn that expressed things I don't believe. I even have a hard time with various "patriotic" hymns these days.
During my stint in boarding school I had to go to chapel three times a week, and there were plenty of hymns; none of which I agreed with. I did the same - observe respectful silence.
posted
777- You have to understand, though, that if a girl is dressed immodestly and makes you masturbate, that's not her fault. The fact that certain things make you do something you see as bad is not their fault. You need to take responsiblity for yourself, for your own responses and your own actions. No one else but you is responsible for your sin.
Posts: 4655 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
blacwolve: I completely understand. Don't get me wrong; I acknowledge that when something like that happens, the majority of the fault lies with me. For the most part, I just ignore it and get on with my life. I've gotten to the point where much of this immorality just doesn't get to me anymore.
However, I'm still advocating for a measure against blatantly public pornography. Those towns in New England, for instance, with nudes lining the streets "because they can." (I'll try to find the link to that story.) There are many things that I will take blame for. There are some that I just won't tolerate, either way.
Pornography has been a problem for me for the past several years. Ever since puberty began, I've been constantly smacked over the head with sexually-oriented shocks, stumbling across material that made me feel dirty when I looked at it... Some of that stuff is unforgettable, in a horrendous way. The fact that porn was there, and that it's getting more blatant the year, is one of the primary factors for my disgust for it.
Posts: 292 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
This is something which I will not tolerate, sexual stimulation my bad or not. Public nudity is public nudity, no matter what way you look at it.
Posts: 292 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I had a male friend who was not American and the conversation ended up on nude beaches and he was like, I don't get Americans, you seem so excited over the idea. But the thing is, once you are there, it is like, oh another naked person. You really don't even think about it. On the other hand, I was reading a book about Iran and the person was talking about how the taboo against showing hair was so strong that men would go wild over seeing a stray hair. My breastfeeding book talked about being in a room full of Muslim mothers who were feeding their babies. A man came in unexpectedly and they all modestly grabbed their scarves and covered their heads- not one was concerned over her exposed breasts. I think we as individuals and as a society decide what we find stimulating.
Posts: 1001 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm just curious, since this discussion seems to hinge on the understanding that sexually explicit material is currently being parctically thrown at everyone, is this the case everywhere except where I've been in the US?
I grew up in the Chicago suburbs, spent a fair amount of time there as well as further out in the stix, went to school in a rural but populous college town in Indiana and now live and work in LA, as well as having been on various trips to much of the rest of the US (although admittedly little exposure to the north-east or north-west). But I never felt that porn was ever thrust upon me, even Vegas didn't strike me as that terrible (though definately worse than other places).
It's currently Illegal (to the best of my knowledge) to display pornographic images in public. Now admittedly I don't think it's illegal for non-adult stores to display porn inside, though every family-oriented establishment that I'm aware of has internal rules against this.
I realize that culturally we're exposed a fair amount to pornography by others and whatnot, but not in any kind of manner that would make sense (in my mind) to create laws against. Unless you want to start arguing that existing magazines that are not considered porn (Maxim, Glamour, whatever) should be. If that's the case then you may have a discussion worth having, but that doesn't seem to be what's on the table here.
I keep hearing people say things like: "blatantly public pornography" but unless I'm just horribly unaware of the world around me, the whole topic is a straw man.
Can anyone correct me here?
Posts: 1038 | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I respect your right to your religious beliefs, 777, but you might find that it's your puritanism which is giving you grief and forcing you to fight what is really a normal biological function.
Of course, copulating with the first available female in sight would also be 'normal biological' behaviour, so once again there's a line to draw. I draw that line according to whether the activity hurts others or myself.
Posts: 1762 | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Euripides: I respect your right to your religious beliefs, 777, but you might find that it's your puritanism which is giving you grief and forcing you to fight what is really a normal biological function.
Of course, copulating with the first available female in sight would also be 'normal biological' behaviour, so once again there's a line to draw. I draw that line according to whether the activity hurts others or myself.
Indulging yourself can hurt others. I have some female friends in committed relationships who are very deprived because their men are happy alone instead of with them. One of them is trying to have a baby and it is like, um, maybe you need to not give him any alone time cause at your current rate, you are never going to get pregnant. And she is very sad because of it.
Posts: 1001 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote: If there are not any such people, you really ought not to object to them.
Ought I not to? Christians who demand a holiday be exclusively Christmasy commit the same mistake I think secularists do, they want everyone to conform to their point of view.
That is, however, a completely different argument from the one you made that I objected to, namely that such a holiday would not be celebrating humanity, but rather a lack of religion. It is incredibly arrogant of you to say "Your real motivation isn't what you say it is, it is this other thing that I and all right-thinking people object to."
Further, since you appear to be talking now about public rather than private celebration, that is a slightly different matter. But if the state is going to recognise any celebrations at all - and I'm not convinced it should - then they have to be secular, or they are implicitly establishing whatever religion's holiday it is. It is not secularists' fault if secularism is the default position; you might as well argue that a lack of explicit recognition of German establishes English as the state language! No it doesn't, it's just what's left when you take out official establishment of languages.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:I'm still advocating for a measure against blatantly public pornography. Those towns in New England, for instance, with nudes lining the streets "because they can."
To you, nudity=porn?
Posts: 866 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by 777: Ah, yes. Here's the story on Brattleboro, Vermont.
This is something which I will not tolerate, sexual stimulation my bad or not. Public nudity is public nudity, no matter what way you look at it.
So, how, exactly, are you going to go about not tolerating it? According to the article, it's legal. When you march up to them and announce you're not tolerating it, what do you expect to happen?
Posts: 7954 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
This issue of modesty is an invention of society. Regardless of anyone's moral views, we are animals, after all. There's no set way for a person to behave.
Posts: 340 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Euripides: I respect your right to your religious beliefs, 777, but you might find that it's your puritanism which is giving you grief and forcing you to fight what is really a normal biological function.
Of course, copulating with the first available female in sight would also be 'normal biological' behaviour, so once again there's a line to draw. I draw that line according to whether the activity hurts others or myself.
Indulging yourself can hurt others. I have some female friends in committed relationships who are very deprived because their men are happy alone instead of with them. One of them is trying to have a baby and it is like, um, maybe you need to not give him any alone time cause at your current rate, you are never going to get pregnant. And she is very sad because of it.
posted
Indeed - one might ask, if the woman is so unhappy, why is she in this 'committed relationship'?
The other side of this is that porn does increase the pleasure of masturbation. If we suppose, as seems reasonable, that guys act to maximise their pleasure (within limits - choosing between masturbation and sex is surely a reasonable place to apply such a theory, though), and further assuming that the pleasure from masturbation is not constant, but varies with the guy, then there must exist some band of guys who, in the absence of porn, would get more pleasure out of sex, but who, with porn, prefer masturbation. Of course, issues of sexual compatibility mean that the pleasure from sex is likely to vary with the partner, and also over time. But that's not so important for this analysis. However, I must say that the sexual satisfaction of women unable to compete (in the minds of some men) with porn does not seem to me a sufficient hurt to ban the stuff.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am not for bannning porn or even blaming porn for the guy's behavior. I am just saying that there are potential negatives to masturbation not connected to religious views.
Posts: 1001 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by scholar: I am not for bannning porn or even blaming porn for the guy's behavior. I am just saying that there are potential negatives to masturbation not connected to religious views.
Like KoM said, if this is such a huge problem, why is she with him? And aside from that, if a guy prefers masturbation to actual sex...that is his problem, as I said. If he wants to actually be in a relationship, he's probably going to have to work on that at some point.
quote:Originally posted by TheGrimace: I'm just curious, since this discussion seems to hinge on the understanding that sexually explicit material is currently being parctically thrown at everyone, is this the case everywhere except where I've been in the US?
I'm asking this same question. The first time I saw any kind of porn was when I was 20, and asked one of my male friends if I could see a Playboy he'd gotten as a joke present. I'd never seen any porn before that, and I've never seen any since. Which is sort of sad, 'cause I'd probably enjoy seeing porn on every street corner. It's too bad that 777 and I can't trade places, or something, then we'd both be happy.
BTW- I've probably asked you this before, but where did you go to school, Grimace? I lived in Bloomington and now I'm going to Purdue, so I have experience with 2 of the big three universities in Indiana.
Posts: 4655 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
John Van Dyke: "If our children can buy pornography on any street corner for five dollars, isn't that too high a price to pay for free speech?"
President Bartlet: "No."
John: "Really?"
President Barlet: "On the other hand, I do think that five dollars is too high a price to pay for pornography."
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
