The Religious Right’s newest adversary of evangelicalism and outward disdain for pornography may have less to do with their distaste for it and more to do with the fact it is maxing out their credit cards.
Jerry Falwell may be dead, but the Moral Majority mob is still dealing out duplicity on issues of faith and flesh. In another dramatic display of heretical hypocrisy, a poll taken by the self-proclaimed "World's most Christian website", Christianet.com, found that a majority of Christian men – fifty-percent – are addicted to pornography! Additionally, the poll also reported that 20% of Christian women are keen to sneaking a peek at others fornicating for fun. Technology, in all its modern, unseemly depravity, it would presumably appear, is to blame.
Refreshing the reader's memory, these "porn again" Christians belong to the fomenting faction of virtuous prudes that fervently lined up and espoused former Attorney General John Ashcroft's "Crusade against Porn" and pleaded that the semi-nude, Art Deco statues – found in the halls of the Justice Department – have curtains draped over the exposed breasts of the sculptures. These same “modesty police” also stridently called for former President Bill Clinton's impeachment for a minor infidelity while residing in the White House. Being furtively naughty, it appears, is the new haughty for the holy.
Bill Cooper, President of Christianet.com, said, "We are seeing an escalation to the problem in both men and women who regularly attend church." The holy-roller Cooper, in usual self-righteous, sanctimonious style, offers his impressive imaginary reason for the increase: "Technology has allowed pornography to flood the marketplace beyond a controllable level." Evidently, Mr. Cooper feels he is having difficulty keeping his flock together and decided to blame his lack of dominion over the righteously duped on the grass of which they graze rather than the shepherd in charge of herding his sheeple.
The website, Christianet.com, can only be described as a cornucopia of naked pandering of Christianity for profit and a brazen marketing of faith-based propaganda. A quick review of the site will find links on everything from "Christian jobs" to "Christian insurance" and the ubiquitous Christian favorite, "Chick-fil-A." With an aficionado list of religious-right favorites from "Obeying the Creationist View" to the "Chief-in-Pharisee" himself, George W. Bush, the website abruptly turns more venal than venereal.
Remarkably, Clay Jones, founder and President of Second Glance Ministries, a co-sponsor of the Christianet.com website and poll, rather disingenuously alludes to a "paradigm shift" during the past four years in which the sexual behavior of so-called 'Christians" has changed. This novel “shift” insinuates that Christians are more apt to stray – due to advances in technology – as of late and search out a piece of finely purveyed filth on film. Perhaps it is not human behavior that has changed, but ironically, the incorrectly blamed technology for the shift in seedy activities is the very mechanism that has exposed the religious-right's voracious appetite for flesh peddler's products all along.
Another salacious tidbit from their "poll on porn for Christians" is that, "60% of the women who answered the survey confessed [to] having significant struggles with lust." Furthermore, "40% admitted to being involved in sexual sin in the past year." When a website offers such sinfully rich items to choose from like, "Second Glance", a set of CD's that intimate that an averted glance of sexual nuance presumably reveals you are going straight to the arms of Satan for such wantonness of admiration. It’s no wonder these women have "struggles with lust."
The poll moreover feigns an implication that no one is immune from the "vice-grip clutches of sexually addictive behaviors" and that "repeated attempts at sexual gratification" can fell even the most stalwartly of faith-followers, including deacons and even clergy. What the poll in truth denotes is greater empirical evidence that we are creatures of a sexual nature that inevitably will follow our primordial instincts. That humankind yearns for that which we find pleasing to the eye and pleasurable to our senses. Clergy and deacons – or any other creatures for that matter – insatiable appetites for sexual gratification is purely an untainted attempt to honor our hormonally-driven instinct to "spread our seed" and continually re-populate the Earth. Sans any physical gratification, as Cooper and Jones rather dismally propose as a means to salvation, Homo sapiens would quickly fall extinct.
Scattered about all this Christian pious hyperbole is the banal bantering and over-looked double-standard being applied by the followers of this fundamentally flawed faith. Their belief in a superlative set of human conduct laws, divvied out by dogmatic charlatans, provides suppressive camouflage for reprehensible, spiteful judgment of others. While those that deceptively declare to know Christ best misleadingly warn us of the ever-increasing dangers of the bustle to the brothel of digital desires, they themselves gobble up cinematic sins of smut at a meteoric meter.
While the poll on porn among practicing Christians evokes evidence of an addiction to portrayals of hedonistic acts, a closer examination will reveal an addiction of another kind. It has been said that prostitution is the oldest profession in the world. What the sanctimonious among us are in actuality addicted to is the hawking of old-fashion prostitution. Not prostitution in the literal "street walker" sense, but the degraded, twisted misuse and shameless sale of something of invaluable significance – in this case the Golden Rule of life – in exchange for power and profits, subjugation and submission.
The Christian-right’s affinity for porn – and the need to scorn it – is simply a Full-Monte display of heresy and sacrilege. Thus, this proves once again that the most egregious offenders of the Christian faith, who cannot control their own excesses and indulgences, must forever assign blame and find fault with everyone else but themselves. This time, it’s technology taking the rap.
__________________________

It ain't the technology, believe me
This is what happens - what has ALWAYS happened, all through history - when any significant portion of human nature such as sexuality is suppressed in this way: it's like a lump in a rug. When you stomp it down over here, it just pops right back up over there.
And it's not the technology. This has been status quo for the supposed "holies" among us since I was in high school in the 60's, and probably long before that. The girls I went to school with who were the most likely to "go all the way" were almost always the churchy ones, and the guys with not just Playboy but genuinely raunchy, perverted skin mags at school were almost always the same. Need I point out that this was loooong before the Internet?
One more point: some years ago, my wife and I were involved in a "swinger" group, a weekly series of spouse-swap parties involving same-room sex with anywhere from 4 to sometimes 20 or 30 people. Easily 2/3 of the members of both sexes called themselves Christians, and almost all of the self-identified Christians wore a crucifix (and quite often at these parties, nothing else) while having sex with someone other than their spouse. I found it quite funny - but I wish I'd had the courage then to ask just ONE of them how they justified having group sex with strangers on Saturday night, and then going to church with the family the following morning.
It's not the technology. It's the sex and the suppression. Let 'em make excuses all they want. They're still going to porn websites and swing clubs and parties.
It's the technology's fault.
Wow. Some turn religion into a never ending blame game.
__________________________On the contrary. I did not
On the contrary. I did not see that religion was targeted in the blame game. It was just pointed out that there IS hypocrisy in CLAIMING to be a Christian and still participating in the most unchristian activity of pornography. Furthermore, blaming technology is just one of the many excuses used by these individuals - just like claiming THEY are the victim of an "addiction".
(my apologies if I misinterpreted your response)
Pornography isn't actually
Pornography isn't actually mentioned in the New Testament. It isn't "unchristian"... It's just naughty.
__________________________http://jacobfreeze.com
You are correct. The New
You are correct. The New Testament also does not mention driving drunk, watching pornographic videos or taking heroin – word for word. It does say this, “Finally, brothers, we instructed you how to live in order to please God, as in fact you are living. Now we ask you and urge you in the Lord Jesus to do this more and more. For you know what instructions we gave you by the authority of the Lord Jesus. It is God’s will that you should be sanctified: that you should avoid sexual immorality; that each of you should learn to control his own body in a way that is holy and honorable, not in passionate lust like the heathen, who do not know God; and that in this matter no one should wrong his brother or take advantage of him. The Lord will punish men for all such sins, as we have already told you and warned you. For God did not call us to be impure, but to live a holy life. Therefore, he who rejects this instruction does not reject man but God, who gives you his Holy Spirit” Thessalonians 4: 1-8
I am not an expert on bible text. After reading your comments I was literally flipping through the bible and it opened to this page. This “naughty” behavior is “taking advantage” of misguided individuals and contributing to “sexual immorality” by buying the magazine or video or supporting the web page. This “naughty” behavior is rejecting “God, who gives you his Holy Spirit.” It destroys your soul. And worse it leaves a trail of innocent victims – people closest to you, people you meet every day, and people you don’t even know. The people closest to you are at the greatest risk for obvious reasons, but it affects everyone around you because this behavior is disrespectful, it shows through in all that you do. Supporting pornographic mediums hurt all of those – past and future affected by its existence.
I could go on and on, but like I said, I am no theologian. I could get into the semantics of the word “naughty” and the word “Christian” but it only restates what I have said here. I don’t know if anything I said here will at least make you think, if not, I have a challenge for you. I am not being sarcastic here, this is a serious. Take ownership of your actions that you defend as not unchristian. Next time you feel like being naughty, ask your minister over, better yet – your mother. Pull out your favorite centerfolds, pop in a video, or pull up that web page and sit down next to your guest and while you are sharing this time, look them in the eyes and say “I am a God honoring Christian”. If you can do that, you have defended your position to man. The rest is in God’s hands.
"...ask your minister over,
"...ask your minister over, better yet – your mother. Pull out your favorite centerfolds, pop in a video..."
Watching porn with your mother? If that's your idea of a good time, maybe you're spending too much time in church.
__________________________http://jacobfreeze.com
Jacob, This is anything but
Jacob,
This is anything but my idea of a good time.
You were the one who argued that pornography is ok, even a Christian thing to do. If there is nothing wrong with it, why do you hide it?
why not put the blame where
why not put the blame where it belongs...
...on crystal meth.
That would be nice but there
That would be nice but there is only one place to put the blame and that is with the person who chooses a fantasy porn world over flesh and blood relationships.
And note - I am not saying that ALL people who look at porn make this choice. I'm am saying that those that do, should take responsibility for their actions and and the devastation that their actions cause.
sorry, but you've completely
sorry, but you've completely lost me there.
form where i sit, it seems that "porn addiction" is a problem seen so rarely that the real furor seems to be coming from some other motivation...and it appears that the motivation is to ban porn because of it's "harmful" effects.
well, i'm sorry, but as a card-carrying american who supports the first amendment, i say offensive speech is protected speech.
for example, i would never suggest cutting the offensive material from religious documents, despite the themes of incest and lust and murder, or the support for human slavery, that are so often found in these sorts of texts.
as far as fantasy goes, i know computer geeks who choose programming over flesh and blood relationships, i know workaholics who choose their job over flesh and blood relationships, and all of us probably know a car nut, or a reality tv addict, or, for that matter, religious zealots who choose participation in odd fantasy worlds over the reality of flesh and blood relationships (celibate preists and nuns are a quick example).
they're all harmful to some degree, but i wouldn't ban any of them.
why?
because imperfect people live in imperfect worlds, and they do what we might view as imperfect things. and frankly, i wouldn't want to live in a squeaky-clean, perfect and shiny world.
personally, i find a world with william burroughs and tom waits and larry flint and ron jeremy to be a...spicier world, and from this perspective, that's a good thing.
This certainly has started a
This certainly has started a lively and entertaining debate. I would like to know how you guys are defining addiction here. If we were talking drug addiction there is a distinction between tissue dependence, (which can occur with alcohol or heroin among other drugs) and psychological dependence. Obviously we are not talking tissue dependence. Is this a psychological dependence or is it more physical. If the individual is using the porn as a tool for self gratification, then the dependence may be similar to a cocaine dependence where they feel a need to stimulate the brain's pleasure center. I don't think you can really accurately gauge the harmful effects without defining the parameters of the addiction. I used to work in addiction counseling and I know that word is often misused to define someone with a strong pre-disposition toward a behavior. It is an activity they engage in because they enjoy it not because they feel a need.
__________________________Work and struggle and never accept an evil that you can change -- Andre Gide
i would suggest all the
i would suggest all the "addictions" listed in my comment above fit the criteria you offer, as each is intended to stimulate the pleasure center...in each person's unique way.
As long as porn is something
As long as porn is something that you watch to get entertained its ok but once you start watching porn as a daily routine paying little heed to your responsibilities I would like to use the term porn addict, then. You may not see any apparent harm that porn does to you but there are consequences you will face if you are a "Porn Addict". There are cases where marriages have broken just because the wife feels she is been given attention secondary to porn by her husband. I am not just saying that I have been through that ,Well I am the man involved and after visiting forums like http://www.throughtheflame.org I saw that I was not the only one. There are plenty of people who know that if they watch porn that could be the end of relationships they value or there could be other stake, but people against their will, log into these internet sites offering porn like they are spellbound.
I am not saying porn is bad, if someone can handle porn gracefully, something that I wasn't able to do, I'd say it's okay but if you feel its taking its toll, you need help.
Regards
Jim
I don't get it. How can
I don't get it. How can someone be enteratined with porn when they know their spouse is totally against it. How can one sit and watch it when it is ripping a marriage and family apart? Is that what you'd consider addiction? I was sexually molested as a child by a relative that watched porn and tried things with me against my will. My spouse knows how against it I am. Well my spouse has been hiding it from me for 4 years and Has been obsessed with fantacys and things to try with me. I was unaware of the porn addiction. So, when sexual favors,and other "nasty" things came to me now and then that my spouse wanted to experiment with, it felt like I was 11 years old getting sexually molested again. I love sex. I am a nymphomaniac. I like all different positions and toys, whatever. I love satisfying my partner. BUT when a sexual behavior becomes unnatural (sex the way God intended it) it is molestation. Anything that desenseatizes a person to thinking another person is a piece of meat to experiment with or looses that intimate connection between a partner because they are demoralized by thinking "it's OKAY" to participate in watching porn, that is enough and it is wrong! Do you agree to disagree or support my efforts to ban porn in my relationship with my spouse to not only save a marriage, but a family and any self value and respect that I still have?! _---Suffering
your problem may be solve
your problem may be solve you shall be visit our website:http://www.addictionrecovery.net
comment:Comprehensive resources for those looking for recovery from addiction.
I agree.. and because of the
I agree.. and because of the advent of the Internet, people tend to absorb the messages that bombard them in popular media.
___________________
wilbert
Addiction treatment and recovery resources for the addict and their families. http://www.addictiontreatment.net
your problem may be solve
your problem may be solve you shall be visit our website:http://www.addictionrecovery.net
comment:Comprehensive resources for those looking for recovery from addiction.
This discussion appears to
This discussion appears to overlook the Puritan Ethic and other proscriptions going back to the early days of Christianity. When they made what is natural forbidden, they messed people up good. People who are just entering puberty are the very ones who will feel the most sexual urges and who will be the most rebellious. Forcing them to hide and lie about sex and to be ashamed is cruel and destructive to the youth as well as society at large, not to mention that forbidden fruit is sweeter and more likely to create forbidden desires.
The whole idea that the body is bad, naughty, etc. is balderdash. If people were more often exposed to nakedness, it would lose its heightened attraction. Naked people are a whole lot more polite than otherwise, too. This society markets what is limited at a higher price than what is abundant. This whole society is built on the shame of naked bodies. Frankly, I'd find it rather adolescent-- if it didn't create monsters and perversions. Limited sexual supply= heightened demand= increased repression leading the neediest, the most sexually denied and damaged, to criminal behavior. Look how many priests, senators, reverends are caught in embarrassing events.